“I have made some unconventional decisions that brought me many pleasant surprises” – 5in10 with Ezgi Özlü
Ezgi Özlü is a Postdoctoral Researcher at the University of Strasbourg and a re:constitution fellow of 2024/2025. She holds a PhD from the University of Strasbourg, where her research focused on how procedural costs affect the right of individual application before the European Court of Human Rights. Her dissertation was awarded the 2024 Thesis Prize by the René Cassin Foundation in France and the best doctoral thesis in Public Law at the University of Strasbourg for 2023–2024. During her PhD studies, Ezgi was a Research Fellow at the Department of International Public Law and Dispute Resolution at the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for Procedural Law. She previously contributed to the Department for the Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights by updating the memorandum on just satisfaction awards. Additionally, she served as a Research and Teaching Assistant in Constitutional Law at the University of Kocaeli. Admitted to the Istanbul Bar, Ezgi holds master’s degrees in Human Rights Law (University of Strasbourg) and Public Law (University of Galatasaray). Having published in three languages, Ezgi’s research interests encompass issues related to access to justice, including legal aid, procedural costs, admissibility requirements, and reparations. She is also focused on topics surrounding the legal profession, such as legal mobilisation, legal ethics, and litigation funding, as well as broader procedural aspects of international adjudication.

How would you explain your research to someone who is not an expert?
My current project is on human rights lawyers. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has been known as an important judicial platform for lawyers who see the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as a way to bring about legal changes in national systems. However, in response to criticism from states, the Court has arguably become more cautious in its rulings. Furthermore, aspects of the reform process have raised concerns about weakening individuals’ rights to bring cases before the Court.
In my research, I examine how this contest affects the strategies of human rights lawyers.
More specifically, I explore how human rights lawyers contribute to the development of the case law of this human rights court despite these challenges. Since the mid-2000s, the ECtHR has begun enforcing stricter rules for accessing its premises. With these stricter rules, lawyers arguably wield more influence than before. Lawyers, together with NGOs, can form networks to support victims of human rights violations by providing expert advice and financial resources. However, not everyone has equal access to these networks. As a result, I argue that human rights lawyers play a crucial role in shaping the ECtHR’s capacity to protect and promote human rights across Europe.
What were academic or personal inspirations that led to your current research?
I would say it is a combination of several factors. After completing my undergraduate studies, I began a master’s degree in public law while simultaneously starting an internship at the Bar Association. During that period, I had the opportunity to attend conferences with human rights lawyers and NGO representatives. These experiences sparked my interest in studying these actors.
In the early years of my PhD, I worked in an interdisciplinary research laboratory where some of my colleagues were applying Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory in their research. Later in my PhD, I joined an initiative focused on the legal profession. My PhD topic was also highly relevant, as I explored costs and expenses at the European Court of Human Rights. I was particularly interested in examining how the Court’s policy on legal costs affects the right of individual application. For that project, I conducted interviews with applicant representatives and discovered that these lawyers were committed to bringing cases before the ECtHR, even when it meant incurring financial losses. All these factors combined to deepen my interest in pursuing this project.
Which stations of your professional journey were particularly formative to you?
In my professional life, I have made some unconventional decisions that brought me many pleasant surprises. I arrived in France in 2016 to begin my master’s studies in human rights law at the University of Strasbourg. Adapting to a new country with a very distinct academic environment, while also overcoming the language barrier, was far from easy. However, I believe that this significant step helped me become more resilient and taught me to adapt to new circumstances.
The following year, I enrolled in the PhD programme at the same university. I must say I was very fortunate to have Professor Elisabeth Lambert, Research Director at the French National Centre for Scientific Research, as my PhD supervisor. I had reached out to her via email, expressing my ambition to pursue an academic career and sharing some of my research ideas. Despite not having met me before, she graciously gave me a chance. From her, I learned invaluable lessons on how to conduct research effectively.
Another milestone during my PhD journey was working as a research fellow at the Max Planck Institute Luxembourg for Procedural Law, in the Department of International Public Law and Dispute Resolution, under the supervision of Professor Hélène Ruiz Fabri. Being part of such an international environment, alongside brilliant colleagues working on diverse topics related to international adjudication, was an incredible experience. We held weekly meetings to discuss our research and update each other on recent developments, fostering a rich intellectual exchange.
Perhaps one of the most challenging yet rewarding aspects of my PhD was choosing a topic that no one had previously explored. While it was a daunting task, it ultimately proved to be deeply fulfilling.
The combination of working with a responsive and empathetic PhD supervisor and being part of a dynamic research institute enabled me to complete my PhD dissertation by the end of 2023. The result exceeded what I had envisioned when I first arrived in France in 2016. The jury provided highly positive feedback on my dissertation. Moreover, in 2024, it was awarded the thesis prize by the René Cassin Foundation – International Institute of Human Rights – as well as the prize for the best doctoral thesis in Public Law from the University of Strasbourg.
How are you ‘doing’ research? What are your most important research methods?
My PhD had an empirical dimension and was primarily based on a systematic analysis of over 5,000 cases and document analysis of approximately 1,000 documents. Additionally, I conducted semi-structured interviews with NGO representatives, lawyers, judges, and registry lawyers of the ECtHR. I developed the theoretical framework as patterns emerged from the empirical findings. For this reason, I drew on various types of scholarship, including civil procedure, legal sociology, public international law, human rights law, and political theory. Looking back, I see that this methodological approach is particularly suitable for a PhD dissertation, where the aim is to examine a topic in great depth from multiple angles over several years.
In contrast, my current research is a shorter-term project and follows a different approach. This time, the theoretical framework is predetermined. I am inspired by socio-legal scholarship that applies Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory to understand power relations within the ECHR legal field. This project adopts a socio-legal perspective, focusing on the actors involved in litigation and their practices.
Regarding the theoretical underpinning, I draw on Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory to explore power relations within ECHR law as a field. In terms of data collection, I conduct a systematic analysis of legal texts and semi-structured interviews. However, when examining legal texts, I shift the emphasis away from case law itself and instead focus on the role of lawyers.
What book, article, film, exhibition or song would you recommend, and why?
Regarding the book, I would recommend The 3 Regional Human Rights Courts in Context by Laurence Burgorgue-Larsen. It not only examines how the three regional courts have developed their jurisprudence but also how these institutions have evolved over time. In doing so, the book places these developments within their legal, historical, political, and sociological contexts.
As for the film, I would recommend Anatomy of a Fall by Justine Trier. It tells the story of a writer suspected of murder following her husband’s death, with their partially blind son as the main witness. At the start of the film, although the most plausible explanation for the husband’s death appears to be an accident, the defence lawyer chooses to build the case around a suicide theory instead. According to the lawyer, it would be too difficult to convince the jury that it was an accident.
I think this scene highlights a significant point: from that moment onward, the focus shifts away from discovering the truth—what actually happened—and instead centres on playing the courtroom game effectively. I find it fascinating to observe how each person in the courtroom defends their position, including the prosecutor, the defence lawyer, the experts, and ultimately the son. The film also vividly portrays how aspects of private life, even those irrelevant to the case, are exposed and become objects of public scrutiny.
Citation: In my professional life, I have made some unconventional decisions that brought me many pleasant surprises – 5in10 with Ezgi Özlü, in: TRAFO – Blog for Transregional Research, 16.01.2025, https://doi.org/10.58079/133gm
OpenEdition schlägt Ihnen vor, diesen Beitrag wie folgt zu zitieren:
Forum Transregionale Studien (16. Januar 2025). “I have made some unconventional decisions that brought me many pleasant surprises” – 5in10 with Ezgi Özlü. TRAFO – Blog for Transregional Research. Abgerufen am 18. Februar 2025 von https://doi.org/10.58079/133gm