I argue that a form of indirect utilitarianism can provide a sufficiently plausible justification for three crucial elements of the ECtHR’s doctrine of proportionality to be taken seriously as an account of this doctrine. I show how indirect utilitarianism can account for the relation between moral rights and Convention rights, the resistance to trade-offs that is a particular property of Convention rights and the nature of the public interest against which rights must be balanced. I argue that the indirect utilitarian account provides a coherent interpretation of the Court’s jurisprudence concerning: (i) aims that express moralistic external preferences and their legitimacy; (ii) balancing and the doctrine of the ‘essence of rights’; and (iii) the Court’s reasoning in Dickson v UK. I conclude by exploring the further work needed to establish more firmly this account’s plausibility as an interpretation of the Court’s doctrine of proportionality as a whole.

中文翻译：

---

欧洲人权法院判例中的相称性、严格性和实用性

我认为，一种形式的间接功利主义可以为 ECtHR 的比例原则的三个关键要素提供充分合理的理由，将其视为对这一原则的认真解释。我展示了间接功利主义如何解释道德权利与公约权利之间的关系、对作为公约权利特殊属性的权衡取舍的抵制以及权利必须与之平衡的公共利益的性质。我认为，间接功利主义解释为法院关于以下方面的判例提供了连贯的解释：(i) 表达道德外部偏好及其合法性的目标；(ii) 平衡和“权利的本质”学说；(iii) 法院在 Dickson v UK 案中的推理。