Judgement without justice: on the efficacy of the European human rights regime
Identifikátory výsledku
Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F68378025%3A_____%2F17%3A00507082" target="_blank" >RIV/68378025:_____/17:00507082 - isvavai.cz</a>
Výsledek na webu
<a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13510347.2016.1154841" target="_blank" >https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13510347.2016.1154841</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2016.1154841" target="_blank" >10.1080/13510347.2016.1154841</a>
Alternativní jazyky
Jazyk výsledku
angličtina
Název v původním jazyce
Judgement without justice: on the efficacy of the European human rights regime
Popis výsledku v původním jazyce
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states. The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups. However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries. However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.
Název v anglickém jazyce
Judgement without justice: on the efficacy of the European human rights regime
Popis výsledku anglicky
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) is widely regarded as the most important human rights court worldwide. This article investigates the extent to which the court addresses cases from countries with the worst human rights performance. Using a new data set on all ECtHR judgments from 1995–2012, the analysis suggests that the ECtHR does not deliver its judgments against members of the Council of Europe with the worst human rights records, but instead against more democratic and affluent states. The reason is that litigating in front of a supranational court requires capacities that vulnerable people are unlikely to possess, except when aided by transnational advocacy groups. However, more judgements are issued against countries that lack independent judiciaries, where cases are less likely to be resolved at the domestic level. While the ECtHR might not address the worst human rights crimes, it plays a subsidiary role in the European human rights protection system by compensating for weak domestic judiciaries. However, the court's inability to independently pursue litigation, together with the lack of capacity in some countries to bring cases forward, have hampered more effective protection of human rights for the most vulnerable in Europe.
Klasifikace
Druh
J<sub>imp</sub> - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science
CEP obor
—
OECD FORD obor
50601 - Political science
Návaznosti výsledku
Projekt
—
Návaznosti
I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace
Ostatní
Rok uplatnění
2017
Kód důvěrnosti údajů
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů
Údaje specifické pro druh výsledku
Název periodika
Democratization
ISSN
1351-0347
e-ISSN
—
Svazek periodika
24
Číslo periodika v rámci svazku
2
Stát vydavatele periodika
GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska
Počet stran výsledku
18
Strana od-do
226-243
Kód UT WoS článku
000394518400003
EID výsledku v databázi Scopus
2-s2.0-84961390688