Advertisement

The Domestic Implementation of Judgments/Decisions of Courts and Other International Bodies That Involve International Human Rights Law

Final Report of the ILA International Human Rights Law Committee (Part 2)
  • Stefan KadelbachEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

For the purposes of Part 2 of the present report, the ILA International Human Rights Law Committee (IHRL) sought to examine the legal framework of compliance with international judgments and decisions involving human rights around the world in order to study how the courts of a representative set of countries dealt with obligations resulting from decisions of judicial or quasi-judicial international human rights bodies, the impact of human rights jurisprudence, and the possible trends and parallels in their methods of implementation. As a consequence, the Committee sought to identify Guidelines regarding the nature of the obligations assumed by a state party to an international human rights treaty or vis-à-vis a judgment from a human rights body or an international body that involves human rights. The Guidelines are annexed to the Resolution adopted on August 11, 2016.

References

  1. Ahl B (2015) The rise of China and international human rights law. Human Rights Q 37:637–661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anagnostou D, Mungiu-Pippidi A (2014) Domestic implementation of human rights judgments in Europe: legal infrastructure and government effectiveness matter. Eur J Int Law 25:205–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anaya Muñoz A (2010) Actors and processes in the generation and change in the human rights policy of Mexico. In: Serrano M, Popovski V (eds) Human rights regimes in the Americas. UN University Press, Tokyo, pp 189–206Google Scholar
  4. Arango Olaya M (2004) El Bloque de Constitucionalidad en la Jurisprudencia de la Corte Constitucional Colombiana. Precedente 2004:79–102Google Scholar
  5. Aust A (2012) Vienna Convention on the law of treaties. In: Wolfrum R (ed) The Max Planck Encyclopedia of public international law, vol 10. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 709–714Google Scholar
  6. Aust HP, Rodiles A, Staubach P (2014) Unity or uniformity? Domestic courts and treaty interpretation. Leiden J Int Law 27:75–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ayres França L (2014) The IACtHR Gomes Lund et al judgment and the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court judgment on the constitutionality and conventionality of the 1979 amnesty law. Int Am Eur Human Rights J 7:141–158Google Scholar
  8. Basch F et al (2010) The effectiveness of the Inter-American system of human rights protection: a quantitative approach to its functioning and compliance with its decisions. Sur Int J Human Rights 7(12):9–35Google Scholar
  9. Bates E (2012) British sovereignty and the ECtHR. Law Q Rev 128:382–411Google Scholar
  10. Benvenisti E, Harel A (2015) Embracing the tension between national and international human rights law: the case for parity. Global Trust Working Paper Series No. 02/2015Google Scholar
  11. Besson S (2008) The reception process in Ireland and the United Kingdom. In: Keller H, Stone Sweet A (eds) A Europe of rights: the impact of the ECHR on national legal systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 31–106Google Scholar
  12. Buergenthal T (1981) To respect and to ensure: state obligations and permissible derogations. In: Henkin L (ed) The International Bill of Rights: the covenant on civil and political rights. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 72–91Google Scholar
  13. Burgorgue-Larsen L (2017) The added value of the Inter-American human rights system. In: von Bogdandy A et al (eds) Transformative constitutionalism in Latin America – the emergence of a New Ius Commune. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 377–408Google Scholar
  14. Caligiuri A, Napoletano N (2010) The application of the ECHR in domestic systems. Ital Yearb Int Law 20:125–159Google Scholar
  15. Caron D, Roth BR (2004) Scope of Alien Tort Statute. Am J Int Law 98:798–804Google Scholar
  16. Cerna CM (2016) Status of human rights treaties in Mexican domestic law. Am Soc Int Law Insights 20(4), available via https://www.asil.org. Accessed 10 July 2017
  17. Chandra H (2014) International human rights Regime and India. Abhijeet, New DelhiGoogle Scholar
  18. de Wet E (2005) The ‘friendly but cautious’ reception of international law in the jurisprudence of the South African Constitutional Court. Fordham Int Law Rev 28:1529–1565Google Scholar
  19. Dugard J et al (2005) International law – A South African perspective, 3rd edn. Juta, Cape TownGoogle Scholar
  20. Flauss J-F (2009) L’Effectivité des arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme: du politique au juridique ou vice-versa. RTDH 77:27–72Google Scholar
  21. Forst D (2013) The execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights – limits and ways ahead. Available under https://www.icl-journal.com/media/ICL_Thesis_Vol_7_3_13.pdf. Accessed 19 Dec 2017
  22. Gerards JH (2014a) Advisory opinions, preliminary rulings and the new Protocol No. 16 to the ECHR: a comparative and critical appraisal. Maastricht J Eur Comp Law 21:630–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gerards JH (2014b) The European Court of Human Rights and the national courts: giving shape to the notion of “shared responsibility”. In: Gerards JH, Fleuren JWA (eds) Implementation of the ECHR and of the judgments of the ECtHR in national case law. Intersentia, Antwerp, pp 13–94Google Scholar
  24. Gil Domínguez A (2004) Constitución y derechos humanos. Ediar, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  25. Glas LR (2016) The theory, potential and practice of procedural dialogue in the European Convention on human rights system. Intersentia, AntwerpGoogle Scholar
  26. Gómez-Robledo Verduzco A (2011) Corte Interamericana de derechos humanos: Caso Radilla Pacheco vs. México. An Mex Der Int 11:561–591Google Scholar
  27. Góngora Mera ME (2010) Diálogos jurisprudenciales entre la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos y la Corte Constitucional de Colombia. In: von Bogdandy A et al (eds) La justicia constitucional y su internacionalización. Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas, Mexico, pp 403–430Google Scholar
  28. Guo S (2009) Implementation of human rights treaties by Chinese Courts: problems and prospects. Chin J Int Law 8:161–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hathaway O (2001) Do human rights treaties make a difference? Yale Law J 111:1935–2042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Henkin L (1997) International human rights standards in national law: the jurisprudence of the United States. In: Conforti B, Francioni F (eds) Enforcing international human rights in domestic courts. Kluwer, The Hague, pp 189–205Google Scholar
  31. Hoffmann L (2009) The universality of human rights. Law Q Rev 125:416–432Google Scholar
  32. Hood R (2009) Abolition of the death penalty: China in world perspective. City Univ Hong Kong Law Rev 1:1–21Google Scholar
  33. Hunt M et al (eds) (2015) Parliament and human rights. Hart, Oxford, pp 485–500Google Scholar
  34. Iwasawa Y (1998) International law, human rights and Japanese law: the impact of international law on Japanese law. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  35. Iwasawa Y (2016) Domestic application of international law. Recueil des Cours 378:9–261Google Scholar
  36. Jahn J (2014) Ruling (In)directly through individual measures. Heidelberg J Int Law 74:1–40Google Scholar
  37. Joseph S, Castan M (2013) The international covenant on civil and political rights, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  38. Klein E (2000) Should the binding effect of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights be extended? In: Mahoney P et al (eds) The European perspective – studies in memory of Rolv Ryssdal. Heymanns, Cologne, pp 705–713Google Scholar
  39. Kozema J, Nowak M, Scheinin M (2010) A World Court of Human Rights – consolidated draft statute and commentary. Ludwig Boltzmann Institut für Menschenrechte, ViennaGoogle Scholar
  40. Lambert Abdelgawad E (2008) The execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, 2nd edn. Council of Europe, StrasbourgGoogle Scholar
  41. Leach P et al (2010) Responding to systemic human rights violations. Intersentia, AntwerpGoogle Scholar
  42. Lee K (2007) China and the international covenant on civil and political rights: prospects and challenges. Chin J Int Law 6:445–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lillich RB (1985) Invoking international human rights law in domestic courts. Unic Cincinnati Law Rev 54:367–416Google Scholar
  44. Lo Prete O (2009) The protection of religious freedom by the national constitution and by human rights treaties in the Republic of Argentina. Brigham Young Univ Law Rev 35:673–695Google Scholar
  45. Lupu Y (2013) Best evidence: the role of information in domestic judicial enforcement of international human rights agreements. Int Org 67:469–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mälksoo L (ed) (2014) Russia and European human-rights law. Brill, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  47. McCrudden C (2015) Why do national court judges refer to human rights treaties? A comparative international law analysis of CEDAW. Am J Int Law 109:534–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. McQuigg R (2011) How effective is the United Nations Committee against Torture? Eur J Int Law 22:813–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Men J (2011) Between human rights and sovereignty – an examination of EU-China political relations. Eur Law J 17:534–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Merry SE (2006) Transnational human rights and local activism: mapping the middle. Am Anthropol 108:38–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Moreira Maués A (2013) Supra-legality of international human rights treaties and constitutional interpretation. Sur 10(18):204–223Google Scholar
  52. Nowak M (2005) CCPR commentary, 2nd edn. Engel, Kehl am RheinGoogle Scholar
  53. Nowak M, McArthur E (2008) The United Nations Convention against Torture, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  54. Nsibirwa MS (2001) A brief analysis of the draft protocol to the African Charter on human and peoples’ rights on the rights of women. Afr Human Rights Law J 1:40–64Google Scholar
  55. Nußberger A (2008) The reception process in Russia and Ukraine. In: Keller H, Stone Sweet A (eds) A Europe of rights: the impact of the ECHR on national legal systems. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 603–674Google Scholar
  56. Oliphant B (2014) Interpreting the charter with international law: pitfalls & principles. Appeal 19:105–129Google Scholar
  57. Olivier M (2003) South Africa and international human rights agreements. Tydskrif vir die Suid-Afrikaanse reg 28:293–310 and 490–511Google Scholar
  58. Pasqualucci JM (2014) The practice and procedure of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  59. Pillay N (2012) Strengthening the United Nations human rights treaty bodies system. UN OHCHR, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  60. Pintado C (2012) Burying the right to justice in backyard battlefields. Am Univ Int Law Rev 27:955–992Google Scholar
  61. Rao PP (2005) Universal human rights and fundamental rights in India. Indian J Int Law 45:564–578Google Scholar
  62. Rosato CM, Cerquieira Correia L (2011) Caso Damião Ximenes Lopes: Mudanças e desafios após a primeira condenação do Brasil pela Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos. Sur 8:93–113Google Scholar
  63. Ruedin X-B (2009) L’exécution des arrêts de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme: procédure, obligations des Etats, pratique et réforme. Bruylant, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  64. Shelton D (ed) (2011) International law and domestic legal systems: incorporation, transformation, and persuasion. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  65. Shelton D (2015) Remedies in international human rights law, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  66. Sicilianos L-A (2014) The involvement of the ECtHR in the implementation of its judgments. Neth Q Human Rights 32:235–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Simmons BA (2009) Mobilizing for human rights – international law in domestic politics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  68. Soley X (2017) The transformative dimension of Inter-American jurisprudence. In: von Bogdandy A et al (eds) Transformative constitutionalism in Latin America – the emergence of a New Ius Commune. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 337–355Google Scholar
  69. Sonelli S (2015) Convenzione europea dei diritti dell’uomo e giudici nazionali nella giurisprudenza ‘trial and error’ della Corte costituzionale. Riv Dir Int’le 98:1155–1170Google Scholar
  70. Spieler P (2011) The Maria da Penha Case and the IACHR: contributions to the debate on domestic violence against women in Brazil. Indiana J Glob Leg Stud 18:121–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Travieso JA (2000) Los derechos humanos en la Constitución de la República Argentina. Ed Univ de Buenos Aires 2000Google Scholar
  72. Tronson B (2013) Courts and their responses to human rights developments. In: Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration (ed) Australian Courts: serving democracy and its publics. AIJA, Melbourne, pp 245–264Google Scholar
  73. Verdier P-H, Versteeg M (2015) International law in national legal systems: an empirical investigation. Am J Int Law 109:514–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Vidyasagar A, Tatiya S (2010) The European Court of Human Rights and India. Asia-Pac J Human Rights Law 2:31–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Viljoen F (2012) International human rights law in Africa, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. von der Groeben C (2011) The conflict in Colombia and the relationship between humanitarian law and human rights law in practice. J Confl Secur Law 16:141–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Zhao J (2015) China and the uneasy case for universal human rights. Human Rights Q 37:29–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Zimmermann N (2015) Legislating for the vulnerable? Special duties under the ECHR. Swiss Rev Int Eur Law 25:539–562Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Goethe UniversityFrankfurt am MainGermany

Personalised recommendations