The Pilot Judgment Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights: The Search for the Necessary Balance | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal. 2021. № 465. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/465/30

The Pilot Judgment Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights: The Search for the Necessary Balance

The article deals with issues related to the modern understanding and application of the pilot judgment procedure of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). It is noted that the pilot judgment procedure changed the distribution of powers between the ECtHR and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (CMCE) within the framework of the Convention mechanism. In this regard, special attention is paid to finding the necessary balance between the ECtHR, the CMCE and the national authorities in this procedure. The author emphasizes that over the past few years, the pilot judgment procedure has greatly contributed to the development of a dialogue between the Convention bodies of the Council of Europe and national authorities to strengthen the “European architecture for the protection of human rights”. The pilot judgment procedure expanded the powers of the ECtHR. In this regard, the author analyzes one of the key issues - the question of the limits of competence of the ECtHR, based on which the latter in pilot judgments can not only recommend, but also prescribe measures of both a general and individual nature, which leads to a change in the balance between the CMCE and the ECtHR established by the Convention. The various factors influencing the development of the pilot judgment procedure are also analyzed. As another important issue in this regard, the author considers whether the European Court participates in the supervision of the execution of its judgments. It is noted that the ECtHR has supervisory functions, deciding on the effectiveness of the created remedy in compliance with the requirements of the pilot judgment. Using the comparative legal method, the author considers the specifics of the pilot judgments of the European Court of human rights, as well as the impact of these decisions on Russian legislation. Statistical data are provided that reveal the impact of the general measures taken on the number of complaints received by the ECtHR about the conditions of detention. The conclusion notes that the pilot order procedure has added a “new dimension” to the tasks of the European Court, as the latter has become involved in overseeing the implementation of pilot judgments and the creation of compensatory remedies. When deciding on requests from the respondent states to extend the time limit for general measures, the European Court also participates in one way or another in the implementation of pilot judgments. The author emphasizes that the effectiveness of both the pilot judgment procedure as a whole and individual pilot judgments depends on many factors, but to a greater extent on the dialogue and search for a balance between the ECtHR, the CMCE and national authorities.

Download file
Counter downloads: 34

Keywords

pilot judgment procedure, Council of Europe, European Court of Human Rights, general measures, necessary balance

Authors

NameOrganizationE-mail
Oganesian Tigran D.Diplomatic Academy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federationt.oganesian@mail.ru
Всего: 1

References

Заявление Комитета министров по случаю 70-летия Совета Европы (Принято Комитетом министров 17 мая 2019 года на 129-й сессии заместителей министров). URL: https://www.coe.int/ru/web/portal/cm-session-17-may-2019 (дата обращения: 17.10.2020).
CDDH Report on the place of the European Convention on Human Rights in the European and international legal order. 92nd meeting, Strasbourg, 26-29 November 2019. URL: https://rm.coe.int/steering-committee-for-human-rights-cddh-cddh-report-on-the-place-of-t/1680994279 (дата обращения: 17.10.2020).
Резолюция Res 3 Комитета министров о постановлениях, выявляющих системную проблему (принята на 114-й сессии 12.05.2004). 2004 // Прецеденты Европейского Суда по правам человека. Специальный выпуск. 2018. № 3 (15). С. 76-78.
Ilchenko I. The implementation of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights: Ukraine's and Poland's Governments practice. 2010. URL: https://www.academia.edu/6825634/The_implementation_of_the_1950_European_ Convention_on_Human_Rights_and_the_case-law_of_the_European_Court_of_Human_Rights_Ukraine_s_and_Poland_s_Governments_ practice (дата обращения: 17.10.2020).
Dzehtsiarou K., Tzevelekos V. The Conscience of Europe that Landed in Strasbourg: A Circle of Life of the European Court of Human Rights // The European Convention on Human Rights Law Review. 2020. Vol. 1, Is. 1. P. 1-6.
Czepek J., Lubiszewski M. Procedura wyroku pilotazowego w praktyce Europejskiego Trybunalu Praw Czlowieka (Pilot judgment procedure in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights). Monografia. Wolters Kluwer, 2015. 200 р.
Sicilianos L.-A. The Involvement of the European Court of Human Rights in the Implementation of its Judgments: Recent Developments under Article 46 ECHR // Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights. 2014. Vol. 32, Is. 3. P. 235-262.
Постановление Европейского Суда по делу «Курич и другие против Словении» от 26 июня 2012 года, жалоба № 26828/06.
Постановление Европейского Суда по делу «Аслаханова и другие против России» от 18 декабря 2012 года, жалоба № 2944/06.
Выступление Председателя Европейского Суда по правам человека Л.-А. Сицилианоса на семинаре, посвященном открытию нового судебного года // Бюллетень ЕСПЧ. 2020. № 2. С. 5-7.
Factsheet - Pilot judgments. 2020. URL: https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/FS_Pilot_judgments_ENG.pdf (дата обращения: 17.10.2020).
Haider D. The pilot-judgment procedure of the European Court of Human Rights, Martinus Nijhoff. 2013. 347 р.
Fribergh E. Pilot judgment from the Court's perspective. Strasbourg. Council of Europe publishing, 2009. P. 521-526.
Исполинов А. С. Конституционный Суд РФ, ЮКОС и практика Европейского Суда по правам человека в отношении справедливой компенсации // Журнал конституционного правосудия. 2017. № 4 (58). С. 23-28.
Sadurski W. Partnering with Strasbourg, constitutionalism of the European Court of Human Rights, the accession of Central and East European states to the Council of Europe, and the idea of pilot judgments // Human Rights Law Review. 2009. Vol. 9. P. 397-453.
Lize R. Glas. The European Court of Human Rights supervising the execution of its judgments // Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights. 2019. Vol. 37(3). P. 228-244.
Keller H., Marti C. Reconceptualizing Implementation: The Judicialization of the Execution of the European Court of Human Rights' Judgments // European Journal of International Law. 2016. Vol. 25. P.829-839.
Постановление Европейского Суда по делам «Valcheva and Abrashev v. Bulgaria» от 18 июня 2013 года, жалобы № 6194/11 и 34887/11.
Постановление Европейского Суда по делу «Wolkenberg and Others v Poland» от 4 декабря 2007 года, жалоба № 11208/02.
Постановление Европейского Суда по делу «Nagovitsyn and Nalgiyev v. Russia» от 23 сентября 2010 года, жалобы № 27451/09 и 60650/09.
Постановление Европейского Суда по делу «Ilyushkin and Others v. Russia» от 17 апреля 2012 года, жалобы № 5734/08 и другие.
Решение Европейского Суда по делу «Шмелев и другие против Российской Федерации» от 17 марта 2020 года, жалоба № 41743/17 и 16 других жалоб.
Филатова М., Бутко А. Условия содержания под стражей: новый российский механизм защиты и практика европейских стран. Решение Европейского Суда по правам человека по делу «Шмелёв и другие против России» // Международное правосудие. 2020. № 2 (34). С. 27-46.
Blankenagel A. The Relationship between the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation: A Reply to Jeffrey Kahn // The European Journal of International Law. 2019. Vol. 30, № 3. Р. 961-969.
Федеральный закон от 27 декабря 2019 года № 494-ФЗ «О внесении изменений в отдельные законодательные акты Российской Федерации» // Российская газета. 31.12.2019. 31 дек. № 296
Официальная статистика ЕСПЧ. URL: https://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=reports&c= (дата обращения: 17.10.2020).
The development of the Court's case-load over ten years. Statistical data for the CDDH. 2019. URL: https://rm.coe.int/steering-committee-for-human-rights-cddh-the-development-of-the-court-/1680945c35 (дата обращения: 17.10.2020).
Aebi M.F., Tiago M.M. SPACE I - 2019 - Council of Europe Annual Penal Statistics: Prison populations. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. URL: http://wp.unil.ch/space/files/2020/04/200405_FinalReport_SPACE_I_2019.pdf (дата обращения: 17.10.2020).
 The Pilot Judgment Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights: The Search for the Necessary Balance | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal. 2021. № 465. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/465/30

The Pilot Judgment Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights: The Search for the Necessary Balance | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – Tomsk State University Journal. 2021. № 465. DOI: 10.17223/15617793/465/30

Download full-text version
Counter downloads: 301