“Principled resistance” against European Court of Human Rights judgments in the light of critical theory

Tolstykh, Vladislav

doi:10.21128/2226-2059-2018-1-79-89

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2019

2021

Publication Types

Select...

Other1

Article1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such incompatibility does not mean the impossibility of the harmony of court decisions, which is achieved when the trends of autonomy and order are in balance" (Tolstoy, 2018b).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Application And Implementation Of International Legal Norms In Russia

Dyshekov¹,

Khabachirov²,

Maremkulov³

et al. 2019

The European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such incompatibility does not mean the impossibility of the harmony of court decisions, which is achieved when the trends of autonomy and order are in balance" (Tolstoy, 2018b).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Application And Implementation Of International Legal Norms In Russia

Dyshekov¹,

Khabachirov²,

Maremkulov³

et al. 2019

The European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Russia and International Law in 2000–2020: 100 Theses About Facts and Trends

Tolstykh

Kudinov

2021

Russ. law j.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper is an overview of the international legal stances of Russia, which were formed in the period from 2000 to 2020. The application of international law within the legal order of Russia is complicated by inconsistency of the Russian monistic concept, unclear status of customary law and general principles of law; lack of a developed judicial tradition. The Russia’s treaty policy comprises wide participation in general U.N. treaties, as well as bilateral treaties in the field of economic cooperation and legal assistance; unwillingness to participate in treaties, if this may entail negative political consequences. Russia backs down from some minor territorial claims in order to ensure stability; in some cases, she does not formulate a clear legal stance, limiting herself to political statements; she refuses to use judicial mechanisms, preferring bilateral negotiations and/or maintaining the status quo, and does not make efforts to create coalitions that support its claims. Russia uses international organizations rather as political fora, and not as a mechanism to create new legal order; she often takes a passive position when considering issues that do not affect its interests; she makes efforts to use the U.N. mechanisms, but sometimes lacks allies and trust from other members of international community. Russia recognizes the jurisdiction of international courts, but takes a passive position by rarely filing suits, objecting to jurisdiction and refusing to participate in the proceedings. The postSoviet international courts are politicized and do not make a serious contribution to the development of integration law. Russian doctrine is experiencing a serious crisis, which is caused by various reasons and can hardly be overcome by the efforts of the corporation itself

show abstract

“Principled resistance” against European Court of Human Rights judgments in the light of critical theory

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Application And Implementation Of International Legal Norms In Russia

Application And Implementation Of International Legal Norms In Russia

Russia and International Law in 2000–2020: 100 Theses About Facts and Trends

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About