Executive Force of the ECtHR Judgments in a Legal System of the Russian Federation (on the Basis of the Practice of the Constitutional Court)

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (12) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Сергей Князев ◽  
Syergyey Knyazyev
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
European Court ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article deals with the complex of issues concerned with the acknowledgement of the executive force of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and ensuring their implementation in the Russian Federation. According to the author, the main difficulties of the implementation of the Convention´s provisions for Russia are not connected with the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms per se, but the interpretation of its norms in the judgments of the ECtHR. The author emphasized that the ECtHR usually avoids the direct conflicts with the Russian constitutional order in a process of decision-making and their execution does not cause any problems in a majority of cases. However, the active using of such tools as evolutive interpretation, European consensus, limits of national discretion, etc. by the ECtHR leads to the fact that its judgments are in contradiction with the Russian Constitution or legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation. Such ECtHR judgments are the subject matter of analysis of present article in a view of the assessing their executive force. On a basis of the systematic analysis of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the author comes to the conclusion about the necessity of surveying of all available to the Russian authorities’ funds to maintain a cohesive European (Convention) and national (constitutional) legal orders. Derogation from the legal obligation of the ECtHR judgments can be permissible in exceptional cases only and may be dictated only by the aims of protection of the state sovereignty and the supremacy of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals Enforceability of ECtHR Judgements in Russia: Alternatives of Interaction Between Jurisdictions

2018 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 01192
Author(s):  
Ivan Usenkov ◽  
Igor Morozov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Russian Federation

Issues of enforceability of the European Court of Human Rights judgements in Russia are considered in the article. The authors infer the priority of the model, in which judgements can be unimplemented if they are contrary to the constitutional law of the country in accordance with comparative legal analysis. However, the state is ought to make everything possible in order to enforce the decision, even interpret the Constitution, if possible. The authors conclude that issues of correlation of sovereignty and regional consensus, subsidiarity principles and supranationality, interpretation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and fundamental freedoms have not obtained a response. The European Court of Human Rights should be more thorough with the aspects of the national legal systems, but rejection of the execution of its judgements is unacceptable. Relevant provisions are to be excluded from the FCL from 21.07.1994 N 1-FCL «The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation».

scholarly journals The System of Procedural Principles of Proceedings in Administrative Offenses Cases

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 153-159
Author(s):  
A. R. Nobel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Decisions

The paper provides definitions of the principles and system of principles of proceedings in cases of administrative offenses. Based on the norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation and the practice of their application, the author substantiates the position that the principles of proceedings in cases of administrative offenses are, to varying degrees, enshrined in regulatory legal acts constituting legislation on administrative offenses, both directly and indirectly. The system of procedural principles of proceedings in cases of administrative offenses is revealed. The author includes the following principles in this system: open consideration; state language; direct examination of evidence; freedom to evaluate evidence; compulsory consideration of applications; freedom to appeal against procedural decisions; competition and equality of the parties; fair consideration of the case; ensuring the right to defense. The content of these principles having a pronounced procedural nature is formed through a systemic interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the case law of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights. The author concludes that, despite the existence of various ways of consolidating the procedural principles of proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, the greatest efficiency of their perception and application will be achieved only when the principles are reflected in a special chapter of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

7 International Treaties in Russian Judicial and Arbitral Practice

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Butler William E
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
The Russian Federation

This chapter explores the role of Soviet and post-Soviet Russian courts in interpreting and applying international treaties. It is clear that Soviet courts dealt more frequently with treaties than the scanty published judicial practice of that period suggests. This early body of treaties may also have contributed to the emergence in the early 1960s of priority being accorded to Soviet treaties insofar as they contained rules providing otherwise than Soviet legislation. Whatever the volume of cases involving treaties that were considered by Soviet courts prior to 1991, the inclusion of Article 15(4) in the 1993 Russian Constitution transformed the situation. A further transformation occurred when the Russian Federation acceded to the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and began to participate in the deliberations of the European Court for Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Re Review of Constitutionality of Article 11 and Article 392(4) Items 3 and 4 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 194 ◽  
pp. 487-502
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
European Court ◽  
Municipal Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

487Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Judgments of European Court of Human Rights — Execution of judgments of European Court of Human Rights — Russian judgments — Whether European Court of Human Rights’ judgments providing grounds for reconsideration of decision in a civil case where opposing decision of Constitutional Court existing — Russian law — Article 392(4) of Russian Civil Procedure Code — The law of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEMS OF THE CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (5) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Валерий Зорькин ◽  
Valyeriy Zorkin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Legal System ◽  
National Level ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
The Russian Federation

The article is devoted to the problems of implementation into the domestic law of the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECPHRFF) and Convention-based decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The author notes that the complexity of the ECPHRFF provisions’ implementation process is caused by the lack of efficient legal remedies at the national level. Among the reasons for failure to execute or for the delay in execution of the ECPHRFF requirements and ECHR decisions, there are lack of coordination of actions between different government agencies and differences in approaches to ECPHRFF interpretation, political contradictions. The article justifies an important role of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in improving the Russian legislation and lawenforcement by means of implementation of the ECPHRFF provisions and ECHR case law. The author underlines that the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation activity is aimed at resolving two tasks: harmonization of the Russian legal system with the European legal framework and protection of own constitutional identity. The author considers the problem of “judicial activism” in the ECHR activity, that is aimed at extended interpretation of the ECPHRFF articles. The author pays special attention to the issue of application by the ECHR of the European consensus methodology which it used to determine the discretion of states in safeguarding conventional rights. At the same time the author points to the inconsistency of this concept in regard to the ECPHRFF basic principles. The author justifies the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation position, in accordance with which ECPHRFF and the ECPHRFF-based decisions of ECHR do not override the priority of the Russian Constitution for national constitutional courts and the Russian legal system in those cases when the Russian Constitution is capable to ensure better protection of human and civil rights and freedoms. The author draws the conclusion that cooperation of the European and Russian legal orders is not possible in the context of subordination; it is necessary to establish a dialogue between the legal systems which is a guarantee of the all-European law development.

scholarly journals Application by courts of judgments of the constitutional court of the russian federation and the European Court of Human Rights in one case

2019 ◽  
pp. 125-133
Author(s):  
A. V. Chaykina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Federal Republic Of Germany ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Russian Federation

The paper deals with the problem of the application by the courts of the Russian Federation of decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights in the same civil case. The problem is caused by the uncertainty of the hierarchy of these sources of law in terms of international and national law. The issue of non-fulfillment of ECtHR judgments was considered from the point of view of the provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties of 1969. The author analyzes foreign practice on the execution of judgments of the ECHR. In particular, the author analyzes the practice of the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany, having faced with the contradiction of the fundamental norms of the state with the ECtHR judgments.The mechanisms to balance the legal positions of these courts have been revealed. The author suggests considering Protocol No. 16 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as one of the possible means to eliminate the contradictions between the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the ECHR. The procedure of advisory opinions, from the point of view of the author, may make it possible to coordinate the legal positions of the ECHR and the national practice of applying the Rome Convention to the stage of submitting a complaint of Russian citizens to the ECHR.

Anchugov & Gladkov v. Russia

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 (2) ◽  
pp. 461-468 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.Kh. Abashidze ◽  
M.V. Ilyashevich ◽  
A.M. Solntsev
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
European System ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional System

On April 19, 2016, in The Case Concerning the Resolution of the Question of the Possibility to Execute in Accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 4 July 2013 in the Case of Anchugov and Gladkov v. Russia in Connection with the Request of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation (Anchugov & Gladkov (Russ.)), the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (Constitutional Court) held that decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are binding on Russian courts, in accordance with Article 15(4) of the 1993 Constitution of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the Constitutional Court stressed the necessity of ensuring a reasonable balance between the obligation to implement ECtHR judgments and respect for the fundamental principles of the Russian Federation's constitutional system. The Constitutional Court found that because the ECtHR judgment in question implicitly conflicted with provisions of the Russian Constitution, Russian courts are not obliged to comply with the judgment regarding issues that remain in conflict; however, other means are available to the Russian legislature to give effect to the judgment. While the decision marks an important development in Russia's relationship with the European system of human rights, it is not inconsistent with the approach taken by a substantial number of European domestic courts in holding that treaty obligations to enforce decisions of international courts cannot justify violating domestic constitutional norms.

scholarly journals Russia`s Participation in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

2021 ◽  
pp. 46-56
Author(s):  
A. Y. Novoseltsev ◽  
K. V. Stepanyugin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Russian Federation

INTRODUCTION. The article examines problematic issues of Russia’s participation in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. According to the authors, the form of Russia’s participation in the Convention, associated with membership in the council of Europe, is unacceptable for its sovereignty. When ratifying the Convention, the degree of objectivity and impartiality of the ECHR in relation to the Russian Federation and the properties of the legal norms of the Convention were not taken into account.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The materials for the research are international agreements, resolutions of international organizations, decisions of the ECHR and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federa- tion, as well as doctrinal sources on the topic. The methodological basis of the article was formed by general scientific and special research methods. The article critically analyzes the arguments in favor of Russia’s participation in the European Convention and examines the reasons why the ECHR can hardly be called an objective court for a country that is not a member of the EU.RESEARCH RESULTS. The authors believe that the unenforceability of ECHR judgements is only part of the problem of enforcing binding decisions of international organizations. According to the authors, it is necessary to determine the fundamental foundations of Russia’s participation in international organizations that can make decisions legally binding for our country, and to limit their circle to the participants of the integration association with Russia, organizations of strategic partners, as well as organizations in which Russia can influence the adoption decisions. The principles of Russia’s participation in international organizations that make legally binding decisions should be included in the Federal Law “On International Treaties of the Russian Federation”.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The subordination of Russia to the jurisdiction of an interstate human rights body must meet a number of conditions that the ECHR does not meet. Because of this, problems arise with the implementation by Russia of the decisions of the ECHR. The authors share the point of view that the ECHR is an effective mechanism for the protection of rights and freedoms, but only for a group of states – European integration participants bound by common interests, values, and coordinated foreign and domestic policies. Therefore Russia needs to return to the rules of cooperation in the field of human rights with European states, set out in the Helsinki Final Act on Security and Cooperation in Europe.

scholarly journals The Relationship between the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation: Conflicting Conceptions of Sovereignty in Strasbourg and St Petersburg

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 933-959 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Kahn
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Interpretive Authority ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Russia eagerly ratified the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in 1998. Twenty years later, the chair of its Constitutional Court now expresses resentment at the subordination of Russian sovereignty. A new law expands his Court’s jurisdiction to deny effect to judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, an unprecedented power that has already been used twice. This article analyses this law and its application in its first two years. Both the claim of ‘subordination’ and the Russian response to it, in law and practice, rest on weak legal ground. But Russia’s action also raises deeper theoretical and practical questions for the ECHR as a ‘living instrument’ subject to the ‘evolutive’ interpretations of the Strasbourg Court. If other member states mimic Russia’s response to these issues, a European human rights system premised on the final interpretive authority of an international court could come to its end.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document