Sport dispute settlement in the European Court of Human Rights: the current state of affairs and some prospects for the future

2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 90-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larissa Zakharova ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 395-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ş. İlgü Özler

AbstractNow is a good time to take stock of the global progress made toward achieving the ideals enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which was passed by the UN General Assembly seventy years ago. Though the UDHR has played a vital role in advancing human rights globally, threats to human rights areever present. Two issues in particular stand out as barriers to further progress. The first is state sovereignty, which presents a fundamental challenge to any effort to establish universal norms. Without strong global institutional mechanisms to ensure implementation, UDHR's impact remains limited. The second major concern is the “siloing” of human rights efforts, whereby civil and political rights have been given primacy over social and economic rights. Emphasis on some principles to the exclusion of others undermines the comprehensive advancement of human rights. The current state of affairs is a product of the collective failure to address human rights holistically and to implement real monitoring and accountability measures for states, which are directly charged with upholding them within their borders.


2015 ◽  
pp. 36-51
Author(s):  
RUDOLF DUR SCHNUTZ

The recent move towards the individual access to constitutional justice is a progress for protection of human rights in Europe. The explicit purpose of these efforts is to settle human rights issues on the national level and to reduce the number of cases at the Strasbourg Court. Such individual complaints have to be designed in a way that makes them an effective remedy which has to be exhausted before a case can be brought before the European Court of Human Rights. This paper points out the current state of these improvements on the national level in a difficult context on the European level and the recommendations of the Venice Commission in this regard.


Author(s):  
Andreas von Arnauld

The chapter deals with the Grand Chamber judgment in Hassan v UK. With this judgment, which focused on the multinational forces operating in Iraq under unified command in 2003, the European Court of Human Rights has presented a landmark decision with flaws. While eventually unconvincing in its approach to derogations from Convention obligations under Article 15 ECHR, the Court has boldly freed itself of the constraints of the overly abstract and largely unworkable lex specialis standard and—as far as Europe is concerned—has paved the way to consolidate its role as the main driver of further substantive convergence. The author presents a rigorous analysis of the Hassan case and on this basis shows whether and how the Grand Chamber’s findings will influence the global debate regarding the interplay of IHRL and LOAC in the future.


Author(s):  
David Harris ◽  
Michael O’Boyle ◽  
Ed Bates ◽  
Carla Buckley ◽  
Krešimir Kamber

This chapter discusses the organization and functions of the European Court of Human Rights. Topics covered include the composition of the Court; the election of judges; the roles of the Court Chambers and the Grand Chamber; pilot judgments; reform of the Court; and the future of the Court.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 121-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lize R Glas

Abstract The States Parties to the European Convention on Human Rights have adopted five declarations on the future of the European Court of Human Rights since 2010. These declarations identified problems surrounding the Convention system and proposed reform measures. This article examines what has become of the proposals aiming to reform the Court’s functioning, which will lead to insight into the problems surrounding the system, the type of solutions proposed and whether the declarations have led to change. The article also discusses the background to the conferences and characterises the focus of each declaration. The conclusion is that most proposals have not been implemented, mainly due to principled or practical opposition of the Court, and that the implemented proposals have not led to profound change. The influence of the declarations should not be overstated therefore, although they can be of political significance by offering support to or criticising the Court.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 307
Author(s):  
Olga E. SHISHKINA ◽  
Olga V. HABIBULINA ◽  
Aleksandr F. REKHOVSKIY

Recently, there has been a substantial increase in the number of judgments delivered by the European Court of Human Rights with regard to the Russian Federation on the complaints filed by Russian citizens, including the complaints related to the liability for administrative offences. The characteristic tendency of the European Court of Human Rights to qualify administrative offences as criminal acts not only brings into focus the issue of ensuring procedural safeguards for individuals charged with administrative offences but also touches upon material aspects of the relation between criminal and administrative law-breaking in Russia as well as changes the traditional juristic view upon the essence of the legislation on administrative offence. Political and economic reforms of Perestroika and the first post-Soviet decade had a significant influence on the institution of administrative justice. Hence, on the one hand, its current state is caused by objective reasons. On the other hand, the legislator, having quite a broad discretion in determining whether to impose administrative or criminal sanctions in each particular case, has seriously blurred the material boundary between criminal and administrative offences. The problem of present-day legislation on administrative offences in Russia is a material hypertrophy of administrative liability together with continuous reduction of procedural safeguards and guarantees for individuals charged with administrative offences. The procedural norms of the existing Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation cannot provide for the adversarial nature of the administrative trial due to the fact that the Code of Administrative Offences of the Russian Federation is not methodologically aimed at regulating administrative (judicial) proceedings.


2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-95
Author(s):  
Collins C. Ajibo

AbstractRegional courts have synthesized, articulated, and elucidated certain principles of law that influence the development of international investment law. The contributions of NAFTA Chapter 11 dispute settlement framework and European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), in particular, have been outstanding. For instance, NAFTA jurisprudence has guided investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) tribunals through influential precedents. Similarly, the doctrine of proportionality and the margin of appreciation doctrine which emerged from the ECtHR jurisprudence have become embedded in international investment law. Indeed, given the unique contributions of regional courts and their rapid proliferation, it can be predicted that they will play even more significant roles in the future development of principles of international investment law. Arguably, such emergent principles should be subjected to a prior scrutiny and filtering by ISDS institutions as a precondition to full incorporation into international investment law to foster their legitimacy and credibility.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document