Helga comes from Denmark and has studied at both Copenhagen and Aarhus University. Before joining the European University Institute (EUI), she taught at Copenhagen University, focusing on human rights law, constitutional law, legal philosophy, and legal sociology.
Her research at the EUI centres on the contemporary political and caseload pressures on the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Specifically, she investigates whether political criticism has altered how the Court adjudicates. In particular, she looks into whether direct calls in the Interlaken reform process declarations for the Court to apply the margin of appreciation more and give more weight to the principle of subsidiarity have impacted the Court's independence and pressured it to change its interpretation of the Convention.
In her thesis, The Margin of Appreciation at the European Court of Human Rights: A Court Under Pressure in Search of Legitimacy, Helga found that, statistically speaking, the Court does not appear to have bent to political pressure and its development of the doctrine of the margin of appreciation appear to be independent of the Interlaken reform process. However, she did note instances where individual cases presented outcomes that conflicted with previous case law. Furthermore, she discovered that political claims about the Court losing legitimacy among the general population were exaggerated. In reality, the Convention and the Court enjoy more popularity among the general population than among elected representatives.
Helga's recommendations suggest caution towards literature urging the Court to act strategically to maintain its popularity and legitimacy among state parties. She argues that as a court of law, the ECtHR derives its legitimacy from its responsibility to administer justice, including maintaining the consistency and coherence of its caselaw. Therefore, a pendulum approach to the stringency of the Convention is likely counterproductive.
Her interest in this topic was sparked during her time teaching human rights law to bachelor students at Copenhagen University. She noticed that cases involving the margin of appreciation were particularly challenging for her students to analyse and predict. This prompted her to delve deeper into the doctrine, discovering a vast array of literature filled with various theories, conceptualisations, and normative discussions, yet lacking consensus on what the margin was for, whether it was a beneficial doctrine, how it was used, or how it impacted the results of adjudication. When Denmark assumed the presidency of the Committee of Ministers in the Council of Europe, the margin of appreciation suddenly became a topic of political debate, with politicians and media discussing it as if its implications were obvious. Both the government and several opposition parties advocated for more frequent application of the doctrine, believing it would lead to more favourable outcomes for state parties. This discrepancy between political certainty and academic ambiguity inspired Helga to investigate what the margin of appreciation truly is, what it does, and why politicians were so convinced of its efficacy. She also wanted to investigate whether the Court had been influenced by this political idea and assumptions about how the margin works.
Currently, Helga is a research associate at the EUI where she is working on the Horizon project ELOQUENCE. In her future work, she hopes to continue exploring the intersections of AI, human rights, and judicial independence.