The principle of subsidiarity is viewed as the cornerstone of the protection of human rights. Internationally, it is primarily the responsibility of states to ensure that human rights are respected and protected on a domestic level and any international protection mechanism is only supplementary. At the domestic level, apex courts in a country also provide only subsidiary protection of human rights, which must first and foremost be protected by lower level courts. Subsidiarity has two facets: the obligation of lower courts to directly apply human rights and the corresponding deference of higher courts to that application. Little attention has been given so far to how domestic subsidiarity of human rights works in practice and how human rights are in fact applied by the primary level of court systems. This article uses Czechia as a case study to test the hypothesis that if lower courts apply human rights, then there is a lower chance that the Constitutional Court, as an apex court, will find a human rights violation in that particular case. By statistical analysis of hundreds of decisions of Czech courts this hypothesis is confirmed. The findings are indicative that subsidiarity actually works in practice.

中文翻译：

---

实践中人权的附属性：捷克宪法法院与下级法院的关系

辅助性原则被视为保护人权的基石。在国际上，确保在国内层面尊重和保护人权是国家的主要责任，任何国际保护机制只是补充性的。在国内层面，一个国家的最高法院也只提供辅助性的人权保护，必须首先受到下级法院的保护。辅助性有两个方面：下级法院直接适用人权的义务，以及上级法院对这种申请的相应尊重。迄今为止，很少有人关注国内的辅助性人权如何在实践中发挥作用，以及基层法院系统实际上如何应用人权。本文使用捷克作为案例研究来检验以下假设：如果下级法院适用人权，那么作为最高法院的宪法法院在该特定案件中发现侵犯人权的可能性较低。通过对捷克法院数百个判决的统计分析，这一假设得到证实。调查结果表明，辅助性实际上在实践中起作用。