Interest groups play an important role within a democratic society. Less is known about their role within the legal system. Meanwhile, interest groups are the driving force behind many high-profile... Show moreInterest groups play an important role within a democratic society. Less is known about their role within the legal system. Meanwhile, interest groups are the driving force behind many high-profile lawsuits against the Dutch government, such as the lawsuits concerning climate change, the quality of asylum facilities, and the Dutch nitrogen policy. This research focuses on the access of interest groups to the courts. How extensive is their access? Does it threaten or protect a democratic society under the rule of law? The access of interest groups to Dutch administrative and civil courts is evaluated in terms of legitimacy and effectiveness. Since interest group litigation is at the intersection of politics and law, the research adopts an interdisciplinary approach. Beyond the boundaries of Dutch legal scholarship, it seeks insights from social sciences regarding the role of interest groups within the political decision-making process. Additionally, it examines, from a legal sociological perspective, the role that interest groups play in public interest litigation in the United States. As a result, the research explores approaches, concepts, and arguments that have largely remained outside of the Dutch legal legal discourse. Ultimately, this leads to a reassessment of both the legitimacy and effectiveness of interest groups' access to the courts. Show less
When nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) encounter state resistance to human rights accountability, how do NGOs use international courts for their human rights advocacy strategies? Considering the... Show moreWhen nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) encounter state resistance to human rights accountability, how do NGOs use international courts for their human rights advocacy strategies? Considering the overlapping phenomena of shrinking civic space within authoritarian, hybrid, and democratically backsliding regimes, and state backlash against international courts, NGOs navigate two potential levels of state backlash against human rights accountability. Building on the interdisciplinary scholarship on legal mobilization, we develop an integrated framework for explaining how states' two-level (domestic and international) backlash tactics can both promote and deter NGOs' strategic litigation at international human rights courts (IHRCs). States' backlash tactics can influence NGOs' opportunities, capacities, and goals for their human rights advocacy, and thus affect whether and how they pursue strategic litigation at IHRCs. We elucidate the value of this framework through case studies of NGOs' litigation against Tanzania at the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights, an understudied IHRC. Drawing on an original data set, interviews, and documentation, we process-trace how Tanzania's various backlash tactics influenced whether and how NGOs litigated at the Court. Our framework and analysis show how state backlash against human rights accountability affects NGOs' mobilization at IHRCs and, relatedly, IHRCs' opportunities for influence. Show less
