{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.023299161230195712, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.469879518072289, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Foreign Fads or Fashions: The Role of Comparativism in Human Rights Law

Human rights law is particularly ripe for a comparative approach. There is a broadly similar common core of human rights, and when analogous issues arise, we would expect to see equivalent answers. Yet there are real complexities in the use of comparative human rights law. Given the important social, political, and legal differences between jurisdictions, how can the conclusions reached by judges in different jurisdictions be evaluated and weighed against each other? The book adopts a ‘deliberative’ approach, which does not regard foreign law as binding, or tending to convergence, but incorporates insights where appropriate and useful. Judicial accountability depends centrally on the quality of the reasons adduced. Comparative materials constitute an important contribution to the rigour of this process. Whether the outcomes converge or diverge, there need to be good reasons, explaining why the textual, institutional, legal, social, or cultural context demands convergence or divergence.