Infringement proceedings against Azerbaijan: judicialisation of the execution of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

Abstract

During the last decades, States no longer tend to invoke the principle of non-interference when it comes to the scrutiny of their human rights record by peer review, reporting mechanisms or judicial procedures. Nevertheless, compliance with the recommendations or judgments of international human rights fora is a persistent concern in a number of States. Infringement proceedings was introduced in the Council of Europe only with Protocol 14 to the ECHR. While for quite a long time dormant, the procedure was invoked in December 2017 against Azerbaijan. This paper lays out the salient features of the procedure and explores whether non-execution could be effectively addressed by the judicialisation of the monitoring mechanism. Whereas the infringement procedure provides strong signals to other States with bad compliance record, it remains to be seen whether it will secure execution, due to the underlying political reasons of non-compliance.

Principled resistance and future of the ECtHR

“…The principled resistance is a formal type (and not a motivated disobedience) towards the obligation of execution of the judgments of the ECtHR. Other terms are also used for this phenomenon: "principled noncompliance" (Breuer, 2019b), and/or "principled non-execution" (De Londras & Dzehtsiarou, 2017;Shauna Wheatle, 2017;Komanovics, 2018;Ahrens et al, 2019).…”