scholarly journals A Critical Analysis Of The Work Of The European Commission And European Court Of Human Rights In Relation With Non-Compliance Of Interim Measures - Period 1957-2011

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Burbano Herrera
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
European Court ◽  
Interim Measures

A Critical Analysis Of The Work Of The European Commission And European Court Of Human Rights In Relation With Non-Compliance Of Interim Measures - Period 1957-2011

scholarly journals Staying the Return of Aliens from Europe through Interim Measures: The Case-law of the European Commission and the European Court of Human Rights

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yves Haeck ◽  
Clara Burbano Herrera
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Medical Treatment ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Clear Tendency ◽  
European Court ◽  
Interim Measures

AbstractThe Strasbourg case-law demonstrates a clear tendency to protect aliens through interim measures in case of imminent deportation. Usually but not uniquely those persons claim(ed) before the supervisory organs to be in a situation of extreme gravity in case of forcible return to their country of origin because they can be subject to the death penalty, life imprisonment, persecution for their political activities, deprived of medicine/adequate medical treatment. This contribution explores which typologies of cases have led the European Commission and Court to apply interim measures in those situations, as well as which rights and freedoms have been protected thereby.

scholarly journals A Critical Analysis Of The Work Of The European Commission And European Court Of Human Rights In Relation With Non-Compliance Of Interim Measures - Period 1957-2011

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Clara Burbano Herrera
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Daily Basis ◽  
Member States ◽  
Founding Fathers ◽  
Supervisory System ◽  
European Court ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Interim Measures

<p style="text-align: justify;"><strong>Abstract</strong></p><p style="text-align: justify;">Today, interim measures have a key role in many of the cases that are brought before the European Human Rights System. The instrument has been designed to preserve and protect rights and freedoms to persons in a situation of extreme gravity and urgency, together with the interests of the parties in a case before the Court. This legal figure has been applied – nowadays – on a daily basis for more than half a century, first by the former European Commission on Human Rights (European Commission or Commission) and later by the European Court of Human Rights (European Court, Court or ECtHR).</p><p style="text-align: justify;">Despite the fact that interim measures have over time acquired a growing importance in the case law, States when faced with such a measure requiring them to act, sometimes refuse to abide by them. This contribution aims to give an exhaustive overview of the State incompliances. It is argued that the number of non-compliances is steadily growing, as is the number of perpetrators, not only among the ‘new’ Member States, but also among the ‘older’ member States and even the ‘founding fathers’ and that this can have a negative effect on the supervisory system as a whole. Some initiatives can, however, be taken by the European Court and the Committee of Ministers to improve and streamline the procedure with regard to interim measures, whereby all actors in the dispute may benefit.</p>

scholarly journals The legal meaning of the terms "torture", "inhuman treatment or punishment", "degrading treatment or punishment" and their distinction in the decisions of the European commission of human rights and the European court of human rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-33
Author(s):  
Khrystyna YAMELSKA
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Legal Meaning

The paper reveals the legal meaning of the terms "torture", "inhuman treatment or punishment", "treatment or punishment that degrades human dignity". A distinction between these concepts is made on the examples of court decisions of European courts, taking into account the individual circumstances of each case. The genesis of the origin of the above concepts is investigated through a prism of the decisions of the European Commission of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. The paper reveals the absolute nature of the "jus cogens" norm of Article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The author proposes to modernize the Ukrainian criminal legislation on the reception of the position of the European Court of Human Rights on the delimitation of these concepts. In contrast to the European convention regulation of ill-treatment, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the author notes that the Ukrainian legislation regulates this issue quite succinctly. The Article 127 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine provides a definition only of torture, which in essence coincides with the definition of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the position of the European Court of Human Rights. The paper notes that the practice of Ukrainian courts shows that a distinction (similar to that provided by the European Court of Human Rights) is not implemented.

scholarly journals Interim measures as human rights protection instruments: to the problem statement

2021 ◽  
pp. 539-544
Author(s):  
Siuzanna Mnatsakanian
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Level ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Core Issue ◽  
Great Practice ◽  
Interim Measures ◽  
Human Rights Violation

Conceptual approaches to defining the nature and the scope of interim measures implementation as an instrument of human rights protection at international and national level are analyzed. The widespread use of interim measures as international standard of urgent respond to alleged violations of human rights has not led to the implementation of the legal institute concerned at the national level. Accordingly, this analysis aimed at defining the grounds of interim measures as human rights protection instrument application to be used by the state as an immediate response to human rights violations and possible violations. European Court of Human Rights has a great practice of interim measures granting. Interim measures are granted by the Court only in clearly defined conditions, namely where there is a risk that serious violations of the Convention might occur. A high proportion of requests for interim measures are inappropriate and are therefore refused. Besides, interim measures are applied upon request of the applicant claiming about alleged violations of his or her human rights. At the national level interim measures should/may be granted upon request of the applicant or by the duty-bearer’s initiative to prevent possible human rights violations. The grounds of interim measures granting should also be defined – the best international practice should be used taking into account the Ukrainian context. Another core issue analyzed is defining duty-bearers – subjects enforced to grant interim to prevent abuse in the sphere concerned. It is obvious that court shall be the only authority to resolve the substantive case of alleged human rights violation. However, public and local authorities shall be enabled to grant interim measures to prevent the possible violations. With this, the scope and the sphere of its application at the national level shall be broader in comparison with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights.

scholarly journals Dismantling the Iron-Cage: the Discursive Persistence and Legal Failure of a “Bureaucratic Rational” Construction of the Admissibility Decision-Making of the European Court of Human Rights

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 1786-1812 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Tickell
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
Iron Cage ◽  
European Court ◽  
Rational Construction

Over the last decade, the admissibility decision-making of the European Court of Human Rights has been the focus of considerable attention in the analysis of the “mounting pressure on the Convention system,” but has enjoyed little critical analysis in legal, sociological or socio-legal literatures. This paper will argue that this combination of intense attention and critical neglect is paradoxical, and has produced fascinating and hitherto largely unnoticed discontinuities and incompatibilities between the rhetorical representation of the Court's admissibility decision-making in ongoing Convention reform debates and the published jurisprudence of the Court on those standards of admissibility.

‘A Risk of Irreparable Damage’: Interim Measures in Proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights

2010 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 313-336
Author(s):  
Pamela McCormick
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
European Court ◽  
To Come ◽  
Human Rights Norms ◽  
Interim Measures ◽  
Irreparable Damage

Abstract Interim measures can be indicated by most international decision-making bodies which monitor compliance with human rights norms to the parties involved in the proceedings before them, in order to prevent the commission of any irreversible actions which would either preclude the proper examination of a complaint or render the final judgment meaningless. The availability of interim measures is an essential feature of any effective judicial system, particularly where fundamental rights are at stake. They play a particularly important role in proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights (‘the Court’). The volume of requests for an indication of interim measures received by the Court each year is substantial and increasing. This presents the Court with a number of legal and practical problems. This chapter examines the circumstances in which an indication of interim measures may be made, as well as the consequences of non-compliance with such an indication, although it is acknowledged that the incidence of non-compliance is low. With its recent case law, the Court has brought the existence of interim measures to the attention of a wider audience, which is desirable as only such an awareness will render the protection of Convention rights practical and effective rather than theoretical and illusory, a stated goal of the Court. However, such a wider awareness will in turn increase the volume of requests again, making it likely that the Court will in years to come have to make significant changes to the scope of requests for interim measures, as well as to its practices and procedures for considering such requests.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document