Abstract

The author of the monograph provides a critical assessment of the Strasbourg case law. She proposes a comparison between the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court case law. In order to achieve that goal, the author goes further than the mere comparison between the two regional systems of human rights' protection, using the Inter-American Court case law as a counterpoint of the European one. Dembour underlines the inverted reasoning used by the European Court regarding migrant rights. This 'overturned' method, adopted by the Strasbourg Court, has had the effect of considering the migrant first as an 'alien' and only later a human being. The comparison with the Inter-American Court and its well-known "pro homine" approach highlights the European Court favor for the State rather than for the migrant.