Welcome

This research project is the first of its kind.  It is undertaking an analysis of the perception of the European Court of Human Rights in five countries to understand how the Court’s rulings are interpreted and implemented in the domestic setting. Here you’ll find information about the project, its research methodology and our output.  To read more about the project, click here.
Başak Çali & Alice Wyss
Bloomsbury, 2008

Comments Off

Filed under Uncategorized

Monitoring the Implementation of the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights now available in Croatian and Turkish

The handbook Monitoring the Implementation of the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights is now available in Turkish and Croatian – adding to the versions already available in English and German.

For the handbook in Croatian click here

For the handbook in Turkish click here

This is a free access recourse. If you would like to post it on your website, please simply inform us at ecthrproject@gmail.com

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Our Handbook for monitoring the implementation of ECHR judgements is now available in German

Our Handbook for monitoring the implementation of ECHR judgements is now available in German.

Just click below.

DIE UBERWACHUNG DER UMSETZUNG VON URTEILEN DES EUROPAISCHEN GERICHTSHOFS FUR MENSCHENRECHTE

This is a free access recourse. If you would like to post it on your website, please simply inform us at ecthrproject@gmail.com

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Handbook for monitoring the implementation of ECHR judgements

The Human Rights Judgment Monitoring Handbook by Basak Cali and Nicola Bruch is now released.

Click here to download your copy of this handbook !  

A key finding of this research project was the lack of knowledge of ngos, legal and non-legal alike as well as lawyers about the monitoring of the implementation of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. We have encountered many lawyers who did not have the knowledge to follow-up their cases. We also met NGOs who were finding the execution process in Strasbourg difficult to understand and follow. This Handbook was developed to address this gap in the knowledge of human rights practitioners. It particularly is aimed at an audience who is new to the European Court of Human Rights implementation process or who does not the knowledge of the process from judgment to implementation.

Translations of the Handbook into other Council of Europe languages are underway. If you are interested in translating the handbook, please contact the authors.

This is a free access recourse. If you would like to post it on your website, please simply inform us at ecthrproject@gmail.com

Click here to download your copy of this handbook !  

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Paper: Lessons Learnt from the Implementation of Civil and Political Rights Judgments

Basak and Anne have recently published a draft paper on the impact of regime design and domestic factors on the enforcement of judgments in Europe. This is a revised version of the paper they gave at the economic social rights enforcement conference in Bogota.

You can download the paper at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1858663

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Legitimacy Report

Click here to download the ECtHR Legitimacy Report that will be presented at the final event of this project taking place at the European Court of Human Rights on May 2nd 2011.

Leave a comment

Filed under Conferences and Workshops, Research Output

Event: The Legitimacy of the European Court of Human Rights – The View From The Ground

On 2nd May at the European Court of Human Rights we will present our findings on the perceptions of the Court’s legitimacy among key stakeholders: domestic judges, politicians, and lawyers who litigate at the Court.

We will then open the findings for discussion by our panelists, who are:

  • Judge Giorgio Malinverni, European Court of Human Rights
  • Andrew Drzemczewski, Head of Law and Human Rights Department, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe
  • Donncha O’Connell, Human Rights lawyer, academic, and candidate for the Irish Senate
  • Anna Sevortian, Russia Office Director, Human Rights Watch.

A paper providing details of the research findings will be made available on this site following the event.   We will also make an audio recording of the event which will be online, so check back after 2nd May to hear the presentation and discussions!

Leave a comment

Filed under Conferences and Workshops, Research Output

Domestic Judges and the European Court of Human Rights: Conflict or Consensus?

On 31 March, Basak presented the findings of research on the perceptions of the authority of the European Court of Human Right amongst apex court judges to an audience of legal and policy practitioners and academics at an event hosted by the Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law .

Basak’s talk set out some of the key findings arising from analysis of the interviews conducted with domestic apex court judges, and the argumentative strategies they employ to make sense of their relationship with the European Court of Human Rights.  In particular, Basak explained three original findings of the research:

1) domestic judges approach the European Court of Human Rights as a form of hybrid authority drawing from notions both of legal pedigree and persuasiveness

2) domestic judges have distinct doctrinal attitudes towards the authority of the European Court of Human Rights

3) ‘Qualified internationalism’ is the most shared doctrinal attitude across the five jurisdictions where the research was conducted.

Following the presentation, a panel chaired by Prof. Jeffrey Jowell QC and composed of

  • Judge Giorgio Malinverni (European Court of Human Rights);
  • Lord Hope (UK Supreme Court Justice);
  • Judge Olivier Dutheillet de Lamothe, (Conseil d’Etat); and
  • Judge Peter Paczolay, (President of the HungarianConstitutional Court)

reacted to the findings of the research.  The discussion was lively, good-humoured, and entertaining, bringing out a number of points of agreement and also some tensions between international and domestic legal obligations.

Lord Hope kicked off the discussion by agreeing that the UK Supreme Court is composed of qualified internationalists, illustrating this by going through a series of important cases.  However, he doubted how wide spread qualified internationalism is within other High Courts, especially those in Scotland.

Judge Malinverni indicated that he was suprised by how many domestic judges did not emphasise  the importance of international obligations as grounding the authority of the European Court of Human Rights.  He further defended the priority of the  Article 46 of the Convention in setting any argumentative framework making sense of the relationship between apex domestic courts and the Strasbourg Court.

Judge  Peter Paczolay spoke about the initial disappointment in Hungary about the Strasbourg Court in the aftermath of the ‘sliding scale of protections doctrine’  in transitional democracies spelled out by the Strasbourg Court after the Rekvenyi case (1999).

Judge Olivier Dutheillet de Lamothe emphasized the different approaches of the French and UK domestic courts and governments to the implementation of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. He concluded that the UK Apex Courts were better than French ones in following the case law of Strasbourg, despite the fact that France has accepted more formal obligations to follow Strasbourg under the Constitution than the UK did under the Human Rights Act.

For a summary of the findings of the research, click here.

Leave a comment

Filed under Research Output