The Inter-State Application under the European Convention on Human Rights provides the first comprehensive monograph about the State-to-State human rights enforcement mechanism. The functions of the mechanism include also dispute settlement aspects, which are related to the compulsory jurisdiction of the Strasbourg Court. The study provides a full account of the development of the Inter-State Application under Article 33 ECHR and puts its case law in the relevant historical and institutional context. The analysis concludes with detailed reform considerations which are situated within the discussion about the role of the European Court of Human Rights. The focus lies on the possibility to address and improve systemic human rights deficits beyond the single case. The Court’s growing inter-State docket evidences the need for legal certainty.
Isabella Risini, Dr. jur. (2017), Ruhr-University Bochum, LL.M. (Chicago-Kent) is a Postdoctoral Researcher at Ruhr-University. Her publications include two edited books,
Verhältnismäßigkeit im Völkerrecht (
Proportionality in International Law, 2014) and
Zeit und Internationales Recht (
Time and International Law, 2018), as well as contributions in leading Human Rights Law Journals.
"[This volume] highlights a rich history in terms of the small but significant contribution the inter-state application procedure has made to ECHR jurisprudence, and its clear relevance today. There is little doubt that the book fills a gap in the literature. It should be of major interest to any scholar or practitioner of the ECHR, as well as regional and international human rights more widely."
Human Rights Law Review,Volume 19, Issue 1, February 2019, Pages 187–191.
"Das vorliegende Buch bietet eine umfassende Auseinandersetzung mit einem bislang eher stiefmütterlich behandelten Thema und streicht die Potentiale des Staatenbeschwerdemechanismus heraus. Auch wenn eine Reform desselben in der Praxis gewiss nicht leicht durchzubringen sein wird, bietet das Werk von Risini dazu wichtige Denkanstöße."
Stefan Kieber, NLMR 2018, 490.
"[...] last year an important book on the often-overlooked other contentious role of the Court (beyond deciding in individual cases) was published."
ECHR Blog, Antoine Buyse (Professor of human rights in a multidisciplinary perspective and director of the Netherlands Institute of Human Rights (SIM) at Utrecht University).
“...an inspiration for understating the challenges and opportunities of a compulsory system...this monograph offers an unprecedented analysis of the inter-state application procedure under article 33 at a time when inter-state applications seem to be gaining momentum”.
British Yearbook of International Law, 2020.
"Isabella Risini’s study is an excellent reference work and the ultimate compendium for all questions concerning the theory, practice and functions of the inter-state application under the Convention."
Professor Gerd Oberleitner,
European Convention on Human Rights Law Review, 1 (2020) 277-302 pp.
Acknowledgements Acronyms and Abbreviations, Legal Citation Format
Any Alleged Breach: The Inter-State Application under the
1.1 Growing Relevance of the Inter-State Application under the
1.2 Object and Purpose of the Inter-State Application
1.3 Link to Current Debate Concerning the Court’s Role
1.4 Stream of Inquiry: Between Collective Enforcement and International Dispute Settlement
1.5 Collective Enforcement
and International Dispute Settlement
The Inception and Evolution of the Inter-State Application under the European Convention on Human Rights 2.1 Overview: The Privilege of Hindsight
2.2 International Human Rights on the Universal Level: Developments Without Specific Enforcement Structures
2.3 The Regional Initiative: The Council of Europe and Its Idiosyncrasies
2.4 Retracing the Notions of Collective and Enforcement
2.5 The 1950 Convention Revisited
2.6 Towards Judicial Supervision: Subsequent Amendments of the Convention
2.7 Results: The Inter-State Application between Collective Enforcement and International Dispute Settlement
International Dispute Settlement and Collective Enforcement Functions of the Inter-State Application Approached Through Comparison 3.1 Inter-State Litigation in Strasbourg and The Hague – A Comparison with a View to the Function of International Dispute Settlement
3.2 The Inter-State and the Individual Application under the European Convention on Human Rights – A Comparison with a View to the Function of Collective Enforcement
3.3 Results: The Inter-State Application between International Dispute Settlement and Collective Enforcement
The Inter-State Case-Law under the European Convention on Human Rights: Approaching the Object and Purpose of the Inter-State Application in Practice 4.1 Collective Enforcement Functions
4.2 Dispute Settlement Functions
4.3 Carving Out the Potential and the Need for Reform of the Inter-State Application
4.4 Greece v United Kingdom (1956–59)
4.5 Austria v Italy (1960–1963)
4.6 Denmark et al. v Greece (1967–1976)
4.7 Ireland v United Kingdom (1971–1978 and 2014–Present)
4.8 Cyprus v Turkey (1974–Present)
4.9 Denmark et al. v Turkey (1982–1985) and Denmark v Turkey (1997–2000)
4.10 Georgia v Russia (2008–Present)
4.11 Ukraine v Russia (2014–Present)
4.12 Results from the Analysis of Inter-State Case Law
Reform Considerations: The Inter-State Application between Collective Enforcement and Dispute Settlement 5.1 General Reform Considerations for the Inter-State Application
5.2 Spelling Out the Object and Purpose of the Inter-State Application
5.3 Dispute Settlement Functions
5.4 Collective Enforcement
5.5 Cross-Cutting: Relationship of Individual and Inter-State Applications
Index of Authorities Appendix Index
All interested in international human rights law and the European Convention on Human Rights (students, scholars and practitioners), the institutional development of the Strasbourg machinery, human rights enforcement and the protection of human rights in times of crises.