针对阿塞拜疆的侵权诉讼:欧洲人权法院判决执行的司法化

Adrienne Komanovics
{"title":"针对阿塞拜疆的侵权诉讼:欧洲人权法院判决执行的司法化","authors":"Adrienne Komanovics","doi":"10.17979/AFDUDC.2018.22.0.5206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During the last decades, States no longer tend to invoke the principle of non-interference when it comes to the scrutiny of their human rights record by peer review, reporting mechanisms or judicial procedures. Nevertheless, compliance with the recommendations or judgments of international human rights fora is a persistent concern in a number of States. Infringement proceedings was introduced in the Council of Europe only with Protocol 14 to the ECHR. While for quite a long time dormant, the procedure was invoked in December 2017 against Azerbaijan. This paper lays out the salient features of the procedure and explores whether non-execution could be effectively addressed by the judicialisation of the monitoring mechanism. Whereas the infringement procedure provides strong signals to other States with bad compliance record, it remains to be seen whether it will secure execution, due to the underlying political reasons of non-compliance.","PeriodicalId":142015,"journal":{"name":"Anuario da Facultade de Dereito da Universidade da Coruña","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Infringement proceedings against Azerbaijan: judicialisation of the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights\",\"authors\":\"Adrienne Komanovics\",\"doi\":\"10.17979/AFDUDC.2018.22.0.5206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During the last decades, States no longer tend to invoke the principle of non-interference when it comes to the scrutiny of their human rights record by peer review, reporting mechanisms or judicial procedures. Nevertheless, compliance with the recommendations or judgments of international human rights fora is a persistent concern in a number of States. Infringement proceedings was introduced in the Council of Europe only with Protocol 14 to the ECHR. While for quite a long time dormant, the procedure was invoked in December 2017 against Azerbaijan. This paper lays out the salient features of the procedure and explores whether non-execution could be effectively addressed by the judicialisation of the monitoring mechanism. Whereas the infringement procedure provides strong signals to other States with bad compliance record, it remains to be seen whether it will secure execution, due to the underlying political reasons of non-compliance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":142015,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Anuario da Facultade de Dereito da Universidade da Coruña\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Anuario da Facultade de Dereito da Universidade da Coruña\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17979/AFDUDC.2018.22.0.5206\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anuario da Facultade de Dereito da Universidade da Coruña","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17979/AFDUDC.2018.22.0.5206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在过去几十年中,各国在通过同行审查、报告机制或司法程序审查其人权记录时,不再倾向于援引不干涉原则。然而,遵守国际人权论坛的建议或判决是一些国家持续关注的问题。欧洲委员会只在《欧洲人权公约》第14号议定书中引入了侵权诉讼程序。虽然休眠了很长一段时间,但该程序于2017年12月对阿塞拜疆启动。本文阐述了该程序的突出特点,并探讨了监督机制的司法化是否可以有效地解决不执行问题。虽然侵权程序向其他遵守记录不良的国家发出了强烈的信号,但由于不遵守的潜在政治原因,它是否会得到执行仍有待观察。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Infringement proceedings against Azerbaijan: judicialisation of the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights
During the last decades, States no longer tend to invoke the principle of non-interference when it comes to the scrutiny of their human rights record by peer review, reporting mechanisms or judicial procedures. Nevertheless, compliance with the recommendations or judgments of international human rights fora is a persistent concern in a number of States. Infringement proceedings was introduced in the Council of Europe only with Protocol 14 to the ECHR. While for quite a long time dormant, the procedure was invoked in December 2017 against Azerbaijan. This paper lays out the salient features of the procedure and explores whether non-execution could be effectively addressed by the judicialisation of the monitoring mechanism. Whereas the infringement procedure provides strong signals to other States with bad compliance record, it remains to be seen whether it will secure execution, due to the underlying political reasons of non-compliance.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信