MISSION IMPOSSIBLE? ADDRESSING NON-EXECUTION THROUGH INFRINGEMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Standard

MISSION IMPOSSIBLE? ADDRESSING NON-EXECUTION THROUGH INFRINGEMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. / De Londras, Fiona; Dzehtsiarou, Kanstantsin.

In: International & Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 66, No. 2, 01.04.2017, p. 467-490.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{18b6fb8bfd4f400c888466c42907dc39,
title = "MISSION IMPOSSIBLE? ADDRESSING NON-EXECUTION THROUGH INFRINGEMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS",
abstract = "Non-execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights is a matter of serious concern. In order to address it, the reasons for and dynamics of non-execution need to be fully considered. This paper engages with non-execution by sketching the underpinning issues that help to explain it and, we argue, must shape our responses to it. Through this engagement, we conclude that non-execution is properly understood as a phenomenon that requires political rather than legal responses. This calls into question the usefulness of the infringement proceedings contained in Article 46(4) of the Convention and which it has recently been suggested ought to be embraced in attempts to address non-execution. Arguing that, even if the practical difficulties of triggering Article 46(4) proceedings could somehow be overcome, the dynamics of non-execution suggest that such proceedings would be both futile and counter-productive, likely to lead to backlash against the Court and unlikely to improve states’ execution of its judgments.",
keywords = "European Court of Human Rights, European Convention on Human Rights , Legitimacy , Execution of Judgments , Law Reform , Infringement Proceedings",
author = "{De Londras}, Fiona and Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou",
year = "2017",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S002058931700001X",
language = "English",
volume = "66",
pages = "467--490",
journal = "International & Comparative Law Quarterly",
issn = "0020-5893",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - MISSION IMPOSSIBLE? ADDRESSING NON-EXECUTION THROUGH INFRINGEMENT PROCEEDINGS IN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

AU - De Londras, Fiona

AU - Dzehtsiarou, Kanstantsin

PY - 2017/4/1

Y1 - 2017/4/1

N2 - Non-execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights is a matter of serious concern. In order to address it, the reasons for and dynamics of non-execution need to be fully considered. This paper engages with non-execution by sketching the underpinning issues that help to explain it and, we argue, must shape our responses to it. Through this engagement, we conclude that non-execution is properly understood as a phenomenon that requires political rather than legal responses. This calls into question the usefulness of the infringement proceedings contained in Article 46(4) of the Convention and which it has recently been suggested ought to be embraced in attempts to address non-execution. Arguing that, even if the practical difficulties of triggering Article 46(4) proceedings could somehow be overcome, the dynamics of non-execution suggest that such proceedings would be both futile and counter-productive, likely to lead to backlash against the Court and unlikely to improve states’ execution of its judgments.

AB - Non-execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights is a matter of serious concern. In order to address it, the reasons for and dynamics of non-execution need to be fully considered. This paper engages with non-execution by sketching the underpinning issues that help to explain it and, we argue, must shape our responses to it. Through this engagement, we conclude that non-execution is properly understood as a phenomenon that requires political rather than legal responses. This calls into question the usefulness of the infringement proceedings contained in Article 46(4) of the Convention and which it has recently been suggested ought to be embraced in attempts to address non-execution. Arguing that, even if the practical difficulties of triggering Article 46(4) proceedings could somehow be overcome, the dynamics of non-execution suggest that such proceedings would be both futile and counter-productive, likely to lead to backlash against the Court and unlikely to improve states’ execution of its judgments.

KW - European Court of Human Rights

KW - European Convention on Human Rights

KW - Legitimacy

KW - Execution of Judgments

KW - Law Reform

KW - Infringement Proceedings

U2 - 10.1017/S002058931700001X

DO - 10.1017/S002058931700001X

M3 - Article

VL - 66

SP - 467

EP - 490

JO - International & Comparative Law Quarterly

JF - International & Comparative Law Quarterly

SN - 0020-5893

IS - 2

ER -