What is it about?

This chapter of the book looks at how the European Court of Human Rights deals with situations where states restrict individual rights to protect democracy. Focusing on recent cases from Latvia and Lithuania, it explains how the Court weighs real security threats, history, and political context against human rights, aiming for a careful balance rather than rigid rules.

Featured Image

Why is it important?

The chapter is important because it explains how human rights law is changing in response to modern threats to democracy, such as foreign interference and hybrid warfare. It is unique in showing how the European Court of Human Rights is moving away from rigid legal formulas toward more context-sensitive judgments, using Baltic cases to illustrate this shift.

Perspectives

I expect this paper to contribute to the ongoing debate of how to save functioning democracies by addressing hybrid warfare. We live in unstable times, when democratic orders are targeted by external or internal enemies. This is especially felt in the Baltic states (Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia), which neighbour Russia and Belarus. Democratic orders seek to uphold international human rights obligations. The question at the heart of this paper is whether we can save our democracies while respecting human rights? It seems that the Strasbourg court's changing approach might help democracies in this regard.

Donatas Murauskas
Vilniaus Universitetas

Read the Original

This page is a summary of: Defending Democracy or Subverting Rights? The Role of ‘Militant Democracy’ in Baltic States Cases before the ECtHR, December 2025, De Gruyter,
DOI: 10.1163/9789004751026_012.
You can read the full text:

Read

Contributors

The following have contributed to this page