Advocacy beyond litigation: Examining Russian NGO efforts on implementation of European Court of Human Rights judgments

2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 255-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa McIntosh Sundstrom

This article examines the ways in which various Russian NGOs, involved in litigation at the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), have worked to advocate for improved domestic implementation of rulings made by the Court. The paper traces these advocacy activities in four key problem areas for Russia’s implementation of the Convention: (1) domestic judges’ knowledge and citation of the European Convention or ECtHR case law; (2) the execution of domestic court judgments by Russian state bureaucratic bodies; (3) extrajudicial disappearances and killings in anti-terrorist military operations in the North Caucasus; and (4) torture or inhumane treatment in police detention. The author finds that the impact Russian NGOs can have upon domestic implementation depends greatly upon the professional cultures and incentives of the actors involved as well as whether or not prevention of violations is compatible with other high-level Russian government agendas.

2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 369-404
Author(s):  
Silvia Borelli

The undeniable impact of the European Convention on Human Rights on the legal systems – and the wider society – of Member States of the Council of Europe would not have been possible without its unique monitoring system, centred around the European Court of Human Rights and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. The present article assesses the extent to which the European Court's judgments that have found violations of the procedural obligations under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention to investigate unlawful killings, disappearances, acts of torture or other ill-treatment have, in fact, led to an improvement in the capability of the domestic legal systems of states parties to ensure accountability for such abuses. On the basis of four case studies, it is concluded that the European Court's judgments, coupled with the supervisory powers of the Committee of Ministers, have the potential to make a very great impact on the capability of domestic legal systems to deal with gross violations of fundamental human rights, and have led to clear and positive changes within the domestic legal systems of respondent states. Nevertheless, this is by no means always the case, and it is suggested that, in order for the Convention system to achieve its full potential in the most politically charged cases, the European Court should adopt a more proactive approach to its remedial powers by ordering specific remedial measures, to include in particular the opening or reopening of investigations.


Author(s):  
James Gallen

James Gallen’s chapter reviews the case and the contributions of Adrian Hardiman and Conor O’Mahony to this book. Gallen argues that their discussion reveals the tension between the principle of subsidiarity and the right to effective protection and an effective remedy in the European Convention on Human Rights. The chapter argues that the case of O’Keeffe v Ireland also raises concerns about the European Court of Human Right methodology for the historical application of the Convention and about the interaction of Article 3 positive obligations with vicarious liability in tort. A further section examines the impact of the decision for victims of child sexual abuse and identifies that the decision provides the potential for an alternative remedy to the challenging use of vicarious liability in Irish tort law.


Author(s):  
Nadja Braun Binder ◽  
Ardita Driza Maurer

This chapter is dedicated to exploring the impact on Swiss administrative law of the pan-European general principles of good administration developed within the framework of the Council of Europe (CoE). The chapter claims that the standards stemming from the European Convention on Human Rights and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights have been adopted in an exemplary way by Swiss authorities. The influence was especially strong in the 1980s and 1990s. The same cannot be said regarding other documents of the CoE, whose impact remains disparate because many aspects of the pan-European general principles of good administration were already part of the national written law. The chapter concludes that despite the exemplary integration of CoE instruments heated debates on the content of these instruments are not excluded from Switzerland.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 340-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elisabeth Lambert Abdelgawad

Due to the intergovernmental and confidential regime set up by the European Convention on Human Rights in view of supervising the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, this field was for many years little suited to dialogue. However, a culture of dialogue has gradually emerged at the European and national levels in order to offer more transparency and legitimacy to the system; the ambitious gamble was that it would speed up and improve the compliance with the judgments of the Court. The current picture still seems to be diversified, with more bilateral and expert dialogue focused on the most serious cases at European level. Meanwhile, a strategy for a more open and constructive dialogue with a very large panel of actors seems to be promoted in some countries. Has dialogue provided a relevant laboratory model to improve good governance and compliance with the judgments of the Court? This article reviews the impact of this new practice. The author concludes that there remains large room for improvement.


Author(s):  
Lara Redondo Saceda

El presente trabajo pretende analizar el sistema de restricciones al ejercicio de los derechos previsto en los artículos 8 a 11 del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Así, el objetivo principal es reflexionar sobre la incidencia de estas cláusulas de restricción, su desarrollo jurisprudencial por parte del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos y su significado en la construcción del sistema de derechos humanos del Consejo de Europa.This paper is intended to analyse the system of restrictions on the exercise of rights provided by articles 8 to 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Thus, the principal aim is reflecting on the impact of these restriction clauses, their case-law development by the European Court of Human Rights and their meaning on the construction of the Council of Europe Human Rights System.


Author(s):  
Andrew Yu. KLYUCHNIKOV

The 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is an instrument for the dynamic development of the human rights system in the member states of the European Council. Such an active formation of the latter is due to the activities of the European Court of Human Rights. However, the case-law of the court is not always accepted in national jurisdictions, especially when it comes to the most sensitive areas of life in modern societies. As the goal of the research, the author sets out the identification of the current approach of this international court to the problem of social rights of convicts, especially in the context of ensuring their social rights. The material for the research was the case-law of the ECHR on the social rights of citizens - with special attention to the rights of persons in places of isolation from society, the legal positions of domestic researchers on the problem posed. The author uses traditional research methods - general scientific and special, with an emphasis on historical, social and legal methods. The paper describes the stages of the international soft law sources formation on penitentiary rules and the impact on this of the ECHR practice in the context of the discrimination standarts prohibition regarding the right of ownership and violation of the forced (compulsory) labor prohibition. A common European standard “the right of a convicted person to retire” has not yet been developed, which has been confirmed in the practice of the ECHR. This decision is due to the need to maintain the effectiveness of the entire convention system, the policy of compromises with states. Through the dynamic interpretation of the ECHR, this right is recognized as an element of the convention rights protection, the convict should be granted an increasing amount of social rights.


2015 ◽  
Vol 109 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-173
Author(s):  
Bjorn Arp

On July 3, 2014, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (Court) rendered its judgment in Georgia v. Russia, concerning Russia’s collective expulsion of a large number of Georgian nationals between October 2006 and January 2007. The Court held that Russia had violated several provisions of the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Convention or ECHR), in particular Article of Protocol No. 4 to the ECHR (prohibition of collective expulsions). Because the Russian government had failed to cooperate with the Court by providing relevant information, the Court also found a violation of Article 38 of the ECHR, which obliges states to furnish “all necessary facilities” for the effective conduct of the Court’s investigation of the case. The Court deferred its decision on the question of “just satisfaction” under Article 41 pending further submissions by the parties. This was the first of three interstate proceedings that Georgia has brought against Russia under the special procedure of Article 33, and it is the first decision on the merits of these cases.


TEME ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 607
Author(s):  
Ivan B Ilić ◽  
Saša Sava Knežević

In paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the imposition of the death penalty is permitted, as a departure from the right to life. In the last decades there has been a tendency for the absolute abolition of the death penalty, in times of war and peace. As a result of this effort, almost all European countries abolished the death penalty. In addition, the Council of Europe adopted Protocol 6 and Protocol 13, which completely abolished the death penalty. The European Court also, in its practice, using the principle of "convention as a living instrument", has changed its approach to the scope of the ban on the application of the death penalty. The authors deal with a critical interpretation of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, trying to answer the question, of whether there has been an abrogation of the provision of paragraph 1 of Article 2, so that according to that provision, there is an absolute ban on the application of the death penalty in the Council of Europe member states.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document