Available in Russian
Author: Alana Siukaeva
DOI: 10.21128/2226-2059-2023-3-148-165
Keywords: enforcement of judgments of the international court; denunciation of the international treaties; international court of human rights; international disputes; international law
This article is devoted to the problems of execution of a State’s obligations under an international treaty after entry into force of that State’s denunciation of the treaty. The author considers the limits of an international court’s jurisdiction ratione temporis as well as possible options for the execution of international court judgments after the denunciation decision’s entry into force. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights proposed classifying by duration all the violations described in complaints filed against a former party to an international treaty. This approach was accepted by the European Court of Human Rights and used in its recent decision against the Russian Federation. Considering the problem of enforcement of the rulings of regional human rights courts, the author comes to the conclusion that the European system for protection of human rights and freedoms does not offer specific mechanisms for resolving the problem of boycott and non-enforcement of courts’ judgments by a respondent State. At the same time, a mechanism of collective guarantees is used by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights as the main instrument for enforcement as to former States Parties. The article examines the possibilities of overcoming the crisis in the dialogue between national and international courts by using this mechanism of collective guarantees. The author considers the Advisory Opinion of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights OC-26/20 on the human rights obligations of a State that has denounced the American Convention on Human Rights. This Advisory Opinion gives participants in the Convention the power to investigate the context and the formal conditions under which the denunciation decision was made at the national level as well as whether this decision followed constitutional procedures which received mixed assessments in the opinions of judges of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, among others. The author also discusses options for preventing denunciation at an early stage, through procedures provided for by the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
About the author: Alana Siukaeva – Ph.D. Student, School of International Law, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia.
Citation: Siukaeva A. (2023) Ispolnenie postanovleniy mezhdunarodnykh sudov po pravam cheloveka pri denonsatsii mezhdunarodnykh dogovorov: v poiskakh kompromissa [Execution of judgments of international human rights courts after denunciation of international treaties: in search of compromise]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 148–165.
References
Antoniazzi M. (2022) Advisory Opinion OC-26/20, Denunciation of the American Convention on Human Rights and the Charter of the Organization of American States and the Consequences for State Human Rights Obligations. American Journal of International Law, vol. 116, no. 2, pp. 409–416.
Ispolinov A. (2022) Prekrashchenie mezhdunarodnykh dogovorov: buystvo krasok za ramkami Venskoy konventsii o prave mezhdunarodnykh dogovorov 1969 goda [Termination of international treaties: a riot of colors beyond the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)]. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 75–95. (In Russian).
Klein E. (2011) Denunciation of Human Rights Treaties and the Principle of Reciprocity. In: Fastenrath U. et al. (eds.) From Bilateralism to Community Interest: Essays in Honour of Judge Bruno Simma, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 477–487.
Langer M.J., Hansbury E. (2012) Monitoring Compliance with the Decisions of Human Rights Courts: The Inter-American Particularism. In: Boisson de Chazournes et al. (eds.) Diplomatic and Judicial Means of Dispute Settlement, Leiden: Brill Nijhoff, pp. 213–245.
Lixinski L. (2019) Mechanisms of Systemic Change in Regional Human Rights Courts: Swinging the Pendulum between Legitimacy and Impact. Cambridge International Law Journal, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 60–83.
Morelli A. (2021) Withdrawal from Multilateral Treaties, Leiden; Boston, MA: Brill Nijhoff.
Pimenova S.D. (2022) Obespechitel’nye mery v mezhdunarodnom pravosudii: Dis. … kand. yurid. nauk [Provisional measures in international justice: Cand. in law sci. diss.], Moscow. (In Russian).
Tiunov O.I. (2011) Mezhdunarodno-pravovye garantii kak sredstvo obespecheniya mezhdunarodnykh dogovorov [International legal guarantees as a means of ensuring international treaties]. Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava, no. 4, pp. 85–95. (In Russian).