Two Birds With One Stone? Governments’ Unilateral Declarations Before the ECtHR and the Reopening of Domestic Proceedings
In: European Convention on Human Rights Law Review, TheSearch for other papers by Lorenzo Acconciamessa in
Current site
Google Scholar
Abstract
This article deals with the interconnection between two relevant trends in the ECtHR’s case law: on the one hand, the increase of strike-out decisions of cases from the Court’s list, where the respondent governments issue unilateral declarations acknowledging the violations alleged by the applicants; on the other hand, the importance of the reopening of domestic proceedings as the most efficient, if not the only, means of achieving restitutio in integrum in respect of some types of violations. It analyses the practice concerning both acceptance of, by the Court, and non-compliance with, by the respondent governments, unilateral declarations in cases alleging violations, the redress of which demands a retrial or the reopening of the proceedings. The contribution aims at assessing whether the Court’s practice is appropriate for the purpose of fulfilling two important aims, namely the reduction of its backlog and the promotion of domestic authorities’ engagement with their obligations.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 313 | 219 | 13 |
| Full Text Views | 35 | 26 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 136 | 112 | 3 |
Two Birds With One Stone? Governments’ Unilateral Declarations Before the ECtHR and the Reopening of Domestic Proceedings
In: European Convention on Human Rights Law Review, TheSearch for other papers by Lorenzo Acconciamessa in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Abstract
This article deals with the interconnection between two relevant trends in the ECtHR’s case law: on the one hand, the increase of strike-out decisions of cases from the Court’s list, where the respondent governments issue unilateral declarations acknowledging the violations alleged by the applicants; on the other hand, the importance of the reopening of domestic proceedings as the most efficient, if not the only, means of achieving restitutio in integrum in respect of some types of violations. It analyses the practice concerning both acceptance of, by the Court, and non-compliance with, by the respondent governments, unilateral declarations in cases alleging violations, the redress of which demands a retrial or the reopening of the proceedings. The contribution aims at assessing whether the Court’s practice is appropriate for the purpose of fulfilling two important aims, namely the reduction of its backlog and the promotion of domestic authorities’ engagement with their obligations.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 313 | 219 | 13 |
| Full Text Views | 35 | 26 | 1 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 136 | 112 | 3 |
