Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-7f7b94f6bd-98q29 Total loading time: 0.426 Render date: 2022-06-29T12:31:03.526Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true
This chapter is part of a book that is no longer available to purchase from Cambridge Core

7 - Individual complaints procedures

Ilias Bantekas
Affiliation:
Brunel University
Lutz Oette
Affiliation:
School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Individual complaints procedures offer a unique opportunity for individuals and groups to have claims of human rights violations considered and their rights vindicated in a judicial or quasi-judicial procedure. For NGOs and human rights lawyers, complaints procedures are an important avenue to pursue strategic objectives, in addition to supporting victims in individual cases. States, on the other hand, may find themselves having to defend allegations of specific or systemic violations. Ideally, complaints procedures act as a mirror that provides an opportunity for states to bring their practices into conformity with the respective treaty. In practice, however, states often view unfavourable decisions as unwarranted criticism, which may create difficulties at the implementation stage. The treaty bodies themselves are in theory neutral arbiters that apply the treaty provisions and rules of procedures. However, inevitably, their position as bodies created by states, and relying on states’ cooperation on the one hand and seeking the effective protection of human rights on the other, raises a host of challenges in actual practice.

This chapter is written generically from the perspective of litigants (which will mainly be referred to as applicants throughout the chapter), examining the common stages of admissibility, merits, decision, remedies and implementation that are characteristic of complaint procedures before treaty bodies (the term is used in this chapter to refer to both UN treaty bodies and regional human rights commissions and courts). Questions considered include in particular, (1) jurisdiction. Who can bring a case against whom in relation to what types of violation alleged to have been committed, when and where? (2) Exhaustion of domestic remedies: what are the reasons for requiring that a litigant take legal steps (pursue remedies) first in the state where the alleged violation occurred? Is it always clear what steps need to be taken? Are there any exceptions? Who carries the burden of proof? (3) Others: are there any time limits for submitting applications? Can a case be brought before more than one treaty body? Does it need to be written in a particular language, etc.? As for the merits, what does it take to prove a complaint? And finally, what is the nature of the decisions treaty bodies can make and the types of remedies awarded? For the post-decision phase, the chapter examines the challenge of implementation.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Burgorgue-Larsen, L. and Ubeda de Torres, A., The Inter-American Court of Human Rights: Case Law and Commentary (Oxford University Press, 2011).
Evans, M. and Murray, R. (eds.), The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: The System in Practice 1986–2006, 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press, 2008).
Joseph, S., Schultz, J. and Castan, M., The International Comment on Civil and Political Rights: Cases, Materials and Commentary, 2nd edn (Oxford University Press, 2004).
Keller, H., Forowicz, M. and Engi, L., Friendly Settlements before the European Court of Human Rights (Oxford University Press, 2010).
Leach, P., Taking a Case to the European Court of Human Rights, 3rd edn (Oxford University Press, 2011).
Open Society Justice Initiative, From Judgment to Justice, Implementing International and Regional Human Rights Decisions (New York: Open Society Foundations, 2010).
Rieter, E., Preventing Irreparable Harm: Provisional Measures in International Human Rights Adjudication (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2010).
ACtHPR:
African Commission:
ECtHR:
IACtHR:
IACHR:
ICJ:
OHCHR: (providing links to all human rights treaty bodies).
American Society of International Law: Electronic Resource Guide .
Project Diana Online Human Rights Archive: .
University of Minnesota- Human Rights Library: .
World Courts: .
Bayefsky: UN Human Rights Treaty System: .
Commonwealth and International Human Rights Law Database: .
Prebensen, S. C., ‘Inter-State Complaints under Treaty Provisions: the Experience under the European Convention on Human Rights’, in G. Alfredsson et al. (eds.), International Human Rights Monitoring Mechanisms: Essays in Honour of Jakob Th. Möller, 2nd rev. edn (Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoff, 2009), 439–64.
Tyagi, Y., The UN Human Rights Committee: Practice and Procedure (Cambridge University Press, 2011), 401,
Centre for Minority Rights Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group (on behalf of Endorois Welfare Council) v. Kenya, 276/03 (2009); Interights, Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa, and Association mauritanienne des droits de l’Homme v. Mauritania, 242/01 (2004); Social and Economic Rights Action Center (SERAC) and Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR) v. Nigeria, 155/96 (2001).
Cançado Trindade, A. A., The Access of Individuals to International Justice (Oxford University Press, 2011), 17–49.
Milanovic, M. and Papic, T., ‘As Bad as it Gets: the European Court of Human Rights’ Behrami and Saramati Decision and International Law’, ICLQ 58(2) (2009), 267–96.Google Scholar
Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm Ve Ticaret Anonim S ¸irketi v. Ireland, (2006)
Democratic Republic of Congo v. Burundi, Rwanda, Uganda, 227/99 (2003),
Isayeva v. Russian Federation, (2005) 41
Brownlie, I., Principles of Public International Law, 7th edn (Oxford University Press, 2008), pp. 299–300;
Lowe, V. and Stalker, C., ‘Jurisdiction’, in M. Evans, International Law, 3rd edn. (Oxford University Press, 2010), 313–39.
Al-Skeini and Others v. United Kingdom, (2011) 53
Al-Skeini and Others v. United Kingdom; Al-Saadoon and Mufdhi v. United Kingdom, (2010) 51
Loizidou v. Turkey (Preliminary objections), (1995) 20
Issa and Others v. Turkey, (2005) 41
Bankovic and Others v. Belgium and Others, (2001) 11
Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), Merits, Judgment, ICJ Reports 1986, 14,
Milanovic, M., ‘From Compromise to Principle: Clarifying the Concept of State Jurisdiction in Human Rights Treaties’, HRLR 8(3) (2008), 411–48.Google Scholar
Wilde, R., ‘Compliance with human rights norms extraterritorially: ‘human rights imperialism?’, in B. de Chazournes and M. G. Kohen (eds.), Human Rights and the Quest for its Implementation (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 319–48.
Wilde, R., ‘Triggering State Obligations Extraterritorially: the Spatial Test in Certain Human Rights Treaties’, Israel L. Rev. 40(2), (2007), 503–26,Google Scholar
Sudan Human Rights Organisation and Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (COHRE) v. Sudan, 279/03 and 296/05 (2009),
Viljoen, F., ‘Communication under the African Charter: Procedure and Admissibility’, in M. Evans and R. Murray (eds.), The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights: The System in Practice 1986–2006, 2nd edn (Cambridge University Press, 2008), 76–138,
Leach, P., Taking a Case to the European Court of Human Rights (Oxford University Press, 2011), 4.101;
Harris, D. J. et al., Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, 3rd edn (Oxford University Press, 2009), 776–81.
Viljoen, F., International Human Rights Law in Africa, 2nd edn (Oxford University Press, 2012), 314–15
Viljoen, F., ‘Fact-finding by UN Human Rights Complaints Bodies – Analysis and Suggested Reforms’, MPYBUNL 8 (2004), 49–100.Google Scholar
Kokott, J., The Burden of Proof in Comparative and International Human Rights (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1998).
Veznedarog ˇlu v. Turkey, (2001) 33
Cavallaro, J. and Brewer, S. E., ‘Reevaluating Regional Human Rights Litigation in the Twenty-First Century: the Case of the Inter-American Court’, AJIL 102 (2008), 768–827.Google Scholar
Leach, P., Paraskeva, C. and Uzelac, G., International Human Rights and Fact-Finding: An Analysis of the Fact-finding Missions Conducted by the European Commission and Court of Human Rights (London: Human Rights and Social Justice Research Institute, Metropolitan University, 2009);
the Center for Research Libraries, Human Rights Electronic Evidence Study: Final Report (Chicago: The Center for Research Libraries, 2012),
Schachter, M., ‘The Utility of Pro Bono Representation of US-Based Amicus Curiae in Non-US and Multi-National Courts as a Means of Advancing the Public Interest’, FILJ 28 (2004), 88–144Google Scholar
Leach, P., ‘Beyond the Bug River: a New Dawn for Redress before the European Court of Human Rights?’, EHRLR 2 (2005), 148–64,Google Scholar
Viljoen, F. and Louw, L., ‘State Compliance with the Recommendations of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, 1994–2004’, AJIL 101 (2007), 1–34.Google Scholar
Open Society Justice Initiative, From Judgment to Justice, Implementing International and Regional Human Rights Decisions (New York: Open Society Foundations, 2010), 33–92.
Rieter, E., Preventing Irreparable Harm: Provisional Measures in International Human Rights Adjudication (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2010);
Herrera, C. B. H., Provisional Measures in the Case Law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (Antwerp: Intersentia, 2010).
Keller, H., Forowicz, M. and Engi, L., Friendly Settlements Before the European Court of Human Rights (Oxford University Press, 2010).
Czajkowski, S., ‘Chad Court Sentences Ex-dictator Habre to Death in absentia’, Jurist (16 August 2008).

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Individual complaints procedures
  • Ilias Bantekas, Brunel University, Lutz Oette, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London
  • Book: International Human Rights Law and Practice
  • Online publication: 05 April 2013
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139048088.008
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Individual complaints procedures
  • Ilias Bantekas, Brunel University, Lutz Oette, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London
  • Book: International Human Rights Law and Practice
  • Online publication: 05 April 2013
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139048088.008
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Individual complaints procedures
  • Ilias Bantekas, Brunel University, Lutz Oette, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London
  • Book: International Human Rights Law and Practice
  • Online publication: 05 April 2013
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139048088.008
Available formats
×