The Execution Of Judgments Of The European Court Of Human Rights

An important provision of the European Convention on Human Rights is that in the event of a violation being found, not only is the state in question required to redress the consequences of the violation vis-á-vis the applicant - by such means as reopening of proceedings at the origin of the violation, reversal of a judicial verdict, discontinuation of expulsion proceedings or, where necessary, payment of a monetary award to the applicant; but it must also take general measures to prevent the repetition of the violation. These latter measures may take the form, for example, of a change in legislation, recognition of the Court's judgment in national case-law, the appointment of extra judges or magistrates to absorb a backlog of cases, the construction of detention centres suitable for juvenile delinquents, the introduction of training for the police, or other similar steps. This second edition continues to examine both individual measures and general measures taken by states in accordance with the Court's judgments and with the supervisory proceedings of the Committee of Ministers, as published in its human rights (DH) resolutions.

This annual report presents the Committee of Ministers' activities in 2008 concerning the supervision of the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. It underlines the very close links between good execution, the proper implementation of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Council of Europe's member states and the case-load of the European Court of Human Rights. The report contains an introduction by the Chairs of the special Human Rights meetings held by the Committee of Ministers to supervise the execution process and a number of remarks by the Director General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs regarding developments in 2008. The execution process and ongoing reform work are also described. Appendices present detailed statistical information, both in general and by state. An important appendix is the thematic overview of major developments in the execution of pending cases. Themes relate to such matters as actions of security forces, detention, aliens, the functioning of the judiciary, freedom of religion, expression and association, the right to property, discrimination, etc. The Committee of Ministers' recent Recommendation (2008)2 is also presented. This text provides a number of recommendations to member states to improve their capacity to implement the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (e.g. to designate a co-coordinator of the execution process). This is the second report since the Committee of Ministers decided in 2006 to publish annual reports (see Rules of the new Rules for the supervision of the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and of the terms of friendly settlements). The first report, for 2007, was presented in March 2008.

Delays in implementing the Court’s judgments, lack of political will in certain states parties, attempts to discredit the Court... In ratifying the European Convention on Human Rights, the signatory states accept the Court’s jurisdiction and authority and “undertake to abide by the final judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties” (Article 46 of the Convention). While certain member states have made real progress in implementing the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, some others face serious structural and political problems forming real “pockets of resistance” that delay or prevent the execution of judgments. The Committee of Ministers is still supervising the execution of some 10 000 judgments, although they are not all at the same stage of implementation. This publication highlights the difficulties in implementing certain judgments encountered in the 10 countries which have the highest number of non-implemented judgments against them (Italy, the Russian Federation, Turkey, Ukraine, Romania, Hungary, Greece, Bulgaria, the Republic of Moldova and Poland). It also analyses judgments whose execution raises complex political issues.

In practice and legal doctrine, little attention has so far been paid to the position of the applicant who has taken the long road to the European Court of Human Rights (Strasbourg) or a UN Human Rights Committee (Geneva) and finally won his/her case there. Does he or she see any improvement in his/her position? Does the applicant obtain real reparation? The purpose of this book is to demonstrate how individual case decisions from Strasbourg and Geneva are implemented in the national legal order. Is there a need for improving this implementation, and if so, how can such an improvement be achieved? In this volume several legal practitioners and scholars deal with the issue of the execution of human rights decisions in the national legal order from different perspectives. Emphasis is laid on the execution of Strasbourg decisions in the Dutch legal order, but solutions in other Council of Europe member states are also discussed. The book is intended for lawyers having a special interest in human rights, both at the national and international level.

Since the turn of the millennium, the European Court of Human Rights has been the transnational setting for a European-wide 'rights revolution'. One of the most remarkable characteristics of the European Convention of Human Rights and its highly acclaimed judicial tribunal in Strasbourg is the extensive obligations of the contracting states to give observable effect to its judgments. Dia Anagnostou explores the domestic execution of the European Court of Human Rights' judgments and dissects the variable patterns of implementation within and across states. She relates how marginalised individuals, civil society and minority actors strategically take recourse in the Strasbourg Court to challenge state laws, policies and practices. These bottom-up dynamics influencing the domestic implementation of human rights have been little explored in the scholarly literature until now. By adopting an inter-disciplinary perspective, Anagnostou goes beyond the existing studies--mainly legal and descriptive--and contributes to the flourishing scholarship on human rights, courts and legal processes, and their consequences for national politics.

Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights guarantees freedom of thought, conscience and religion. The protection it affords is of such significance that the judges of the European Court of Human Rights regard it as one of the cornerstones of democratic society. The freedoms Article 9 guarantees have two essential aspects: internal, covering the freedom to hold convictions and beliefs, and external, covering the freedom to manifest one's convictions and beliefs.--Publisher's description.

This collection of papers provides international and comparative perspectives on the much-debated issues of execution of judgments by States and the remedies available for individuals. As the ECtHR's reach and workload increases, it has become imperative to analyse its effectiveness and what happens after it passes judgments. With contributions from leading academics and lawyers, it is of use to both practitioners and students of human rights law.

This volume deals with the domestic effects of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights as a challenge to the various levels of legal orders in Europe. The starting point is the divergent impact of the ECtHR’s jurisdiction within the Convention States. The volume seeks new methods of orientation at the various legal levels, given the fact that the Strasbourg case law is increasingly important for most areas of society. Topical tendencies in the case law of the Court are highlighted and discussed against the background of the principle of subsidiarity. The book includes a detailed analysis of the scope, reach, consequences and implementation of the Court’s judgments and of the issue of concomitant damages. At the same time the volume deals with the role of domestic jurisdictions in implementing the ECtHR’s judgments. Distinguished Judges, legal academics and practitioners from various Council of Europe States are among the contributors to this volume, which succeeds in bringing divergent points of view into the discussion and in developing strategies for conflict resolution.