What does compliance with judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) look like in states on the spectrum of democratisation? This work provides an in-depth investigation of three such statesâArmenia, Azerbaijan and Georgiaâ in the wider context of the growing 'implementation crisis' in Europe, and does so through a combined lens of theoretical insights and rich empirical data.
The book offers a detailed analysis of the domestic contexts varying from democratising to increasingly authoritarian tendencies, which shape the statesâ compliance behaviour, and discusses why and how such states comply with human rights judgments. It puts particular focus on âcontestedâ compliance as a new form of compliance behaviour involving statesâ acting in âbad faithâ and argues for a revival of the concept of partial compliance. The wider impact that ECtHR judgments have in states on the spectrum of democratisation is also explored.
Dr. Ramute Remezaite obtained her PhD from the School of Law, Middlesex University in 2021. She currently works as a Senior Legal Consultant and Implementation Lead at the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre based in the School of Law, Middlesex University where she litigates human rights cases before the ECtHR and advocates for their implementation.
Acknowledgments
List of Figures
1âIntroduction
â1.1âBackground and Problem Statement
â1.2âKey Aims and Research Questions of the Book
â1.3âResearch Methodology
â1.3.1âCountry and Case Selection
â1.3.2âResearch Methods
â1.3.3âStructure of the Book
2âDefining Compliance
â2.1âDefining and Measuring Compliance
â2.2âCompliance Theories
â2.2.1âCausality between Human Rights Judgments and Statesâ Behavior
â2.3âModalities of Implementation in the Council of Europe System
â2.3.1âScope and Procedure of cm Supervision
â2.3.2âInvolvement of other Actors in the cm Supervision Process
3âAzerbaijan The New Achilles Heel of the Council of Europe?
â3.1âAzerbaijan and CoE
â3.1.1âAzerbaijanâs Accession to the CoE
â3.2âAzerbaijanâs Compliance with ECtHR Judgments
â3.2.1âAzerbaijan and the Court
â3.2.2âDomestic Implementation System: One Manâs Land
â3.2.2.1âDual Role of the Agentâs Office
â3.2.2.2âAllocation of Resources
â3.2.2.3âAbsence of Formal Procedures for Coordination and Involvement in the Process
â3.2.2.4âAbsence of Information and Public Scrutiny
â3.2.3âSystematic Failure of âGood Faithâ Engagement with the cm
â3.2.3.1âTriggers for Governmentâs Engagement with the cm Supervision Process
â3.2.3.2âWhat Systemic Change on the Ground?
â3.2.4âExplaining Azerbaijanâs Absence of Good Faith
â3.2.5âAdequacy of the Response of the cm and the CoE to Azerbaijanâs Acting in Bad Faith
â3.2.6âWhy Does Azerbaijan Remain in the CoE?
â3.3âConclusion
4âArmeniaâs Compliance with Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights A Litmus Test for the Council of Europe?
â4.1âArmenia and CoE: Historical and Contextual Setting
â4.1.1âArmenia and the ECtHR
â4.2âArmeniaâs Compliance with ECtHR Judgments
â4.2.1âDomestic Implementation System
â4.2.2âArmeniaâs Compliance with ECtHR Judgments: Good Practices and Challenges
â4.2.2.1âFactors Defining Compliance with ECtHR Judgments
â4.3âStrasbourgâs Contributions to Compliance with ECtHR Judgments in Armenia
â4.3.1âcmâs Engagement with the Supervision of Armenian Cases
â4.3.2âContributions of other CoE Bodies and Domestic Actors to Compliance
â4.4âConclusion
5âGeorgia as Council of Europeâs Success Story in the South Caucasus
â5.1âGeorgiaâs Accession and Its Membership in the Council of Europe
â5.1.1âGeorgia and the ECtHR
â5.2âNational System for the Implementation of ECtHR Judgments in Georgia
â5.2.1âAbsence of Strong Culture of Accountability, and Politicization of the Process
â5.2.2âInsufficient Access to Information on the Implementation Process
â5.3âGeorgiaâs Compliance with ECtHR Judgments
â5.3.1âGeorgiaâs Engagement with the cm Supervision Process
â5.3.2âDomestic Factors Shaping Georgiaâs Engagement with Strasbourg Processes
â5.3.2.1âPolitical Willingness as an Underlying Factor for Compliance
â5.3.2.2âIntrusion of âTraditionalâ Values and Pervasive Discrimination as a Complex Political and Societal Issue
â5.3.2.3ââExternalâ Support to Compliance with ECtHR Judgments
â5.4âConclusion
6âChallenging the Unconditional Obligation Partial Compliance with ECtHR Judgments in the South Caucasus States
â6.1âWhat Is Partial Compliance?
â6.2âForms of Partial Compliance
â6.2.1âMinimalistic Compliance
â6.2.2âDilatory Compliance
â6.2.3âContested Compliance
â6.3âIdentifying Partial Compliance in the South Caucasus States: Methodological Considerations
â6.3.1âPrescriptiveness of Judgments
â6.3.2âLength of Time
â6.3.3âEngagement with the cm Process
â6.3.4âDiversification of Sources of Information
â6.4âExplaining Partial Compliance in the South Caucasus States
â6.4.1âComplexity of Human Rights Issues
â6.4.2âDomestic Political Climate: International Reputation versus Domestic Interests
â6.4.3âEffectiveness of Domestic Infrastructure for Compliance with ECtHR Judgments
â6.5âConclusions
7âBeyond Compliance Identifying Impact of European Court Judgments in the South Caucasus States
â7.1âConcept of Impact of ECtHR Judgments in the South Caucasus States
â7.2âTypologies of Impact
â7.2.1âMaterial Impact on Individual Victims
â7.2.2âMoral Impact on Individual Victims
â7.2.3âDocumentation and Exposure of Statesâ Human Rights Abuses
â7.2.4âWider Legal and Policy Impact of ECtHR Judgments
â7.2.5âMobilization of Civil Society Groups and National Human Rights Institutions
â7.3âConclusion
8âConclusions
Appendix
Bibliography
Index
Academics and practitioners, as well as students at both undergraduate and postgraduate level.