«International Justice»
Issue №1(21)

Last year the Inter-American Court of Human Rights adopted a judgment in the Case of Granier et al. (Radio Caracas Television) v. Venezuela concerning the right to freedom of expression in the field of broadcasting. The article outlines the main points of the judgment, including individual and social dimensions of the right to freedom of expression, and particular importance attached by the Court to the possibility to express and to have access to a variety of opinions. The article further includes a comparative analysis of the practice of the Inter-American Court and the European Court of Human Rights with regard to the following issues: applications submitted by juridical persons, broadcasting licencing and relationship between the right to freedom of expression and the right not to be subjected to discrimination.

INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS: PRACTICE REVIEW 2016
Oscar Parra Vera, Patricia Tarre Moser

The article focuses on the case-law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights from 2016. Throughout this period, the Inter-American Court faced many issues of very different nature. For example, in the case of Workers of Hacienda Brasil Verde v. Brasil the Court examined the enforcement of laws prohibiting slavery and forced labor through the prism of the modern interpretation of these concepts. Further, in I.V. v. Bolivia, the Court confronted the issue of forced sterilization of women and the need of an informed consent of the patient in sterilization procedures. The Court also tried two cases of discrimination based on sexual orientation. In one case, Duque v. Colombia, the discrimination has led to the violation of the right to social security, and in the other case, Flor Freire v. Ecuador, the discrimination was related to the service in the armed forces.

Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie Journal introduces a section containing reviews of the European Court of Human Rights judgments of particular importance for the Russian legal system. For the first issue of the year, the Journal has selected five judgments adopted by the Court in 2016. 

In the present article, the author addresses the issues of compliance of the states with the judgments of various international courts’. Until recently, these issues did not attract much attention of law scholars. Viewing this issue as a part of more general problem of the states’ compliance with provisions of public international law, the author begins his research with a brief review of the leading schools of international law seeking to explain why in most cases comply states do with international law, whereas failing to do so on other not so often occasions. The author distinguishes between effectiveness of the international courts and states’ compliance, suggesting that compliance of the state with the international courts’ judgments should not be looked upon as unambiguous compliance or non-compliance, for the states’ actions most often lie between these two.

The problem of relationship between obligations of states on implementation of the UN Security Council resolutions imposing individual sanctions and fulfillment of duties arising from international treaties on human rights is disclosed in this article through a prism of key decisions taken by international judicial and quasi-judicial bodies: decisions of the judicial organs of the European Union in the Kadi cases, views of the UN Human Rights Committee in Sayadi and judgments of the ECtHR in the Nada and Al-Dulimi cases. In all these decisions the bodies tried to escape application of Article 103 of the UN Charter, although there is a number of ways to allow concluding that the Security Council is bound not only by jus cogens norms, but also by norms related to fundamental human rights. Moreover, in the sphere of protection of this category of rights, the passing of responsibility between the UN as an international organization and its member states is hardly to be recognized as lawful.

The article considers the problem of execution of national courts’ decisions determining the place of residence for the child in cases when parents are divorced and live separately. The focus is made on the analysis of the result of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers supervision over the implementation of European Court of Human Rights judgments on the cases related to non-execution of such decisions on the national level. The attention is paid to the procedure of the implementation and the position of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers in regard to which measures should be considered as adequate and lead to implementation of such judgments.

 The article considers the problem of execution of national courts’ decisions determining the place of residence for the child in cases when parents are divorced and live separately. The focus is made on the analysis of the result of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers supervision over the implementation of European Court of Human Rights judgments on the cases related to non-execution of such decisions on the national level. The attention is paid to the procedure of the implementation and the position of the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers in regard to which measures should be considered as adequate and lead to implementation of such judgments.

The article addresses some key issues of applying interim measures in international commercial arbitration. The institution of interim measures as provisional and conservatory legal arrangements is nowadays the subject of many discussions among law students, legal scholars and lawyers who pay special attention to the employment of this procedural instrument in the process of international commercial arbitration for protecting the rights of the parties in the dispute resolution process. The author examines the very meaning of interim measures and the terminology used in referring to this concept as well as issues of interpretation of this and related notions.

Crimes against humanity as a category of crimes emerged in the aftermath of World War II with the creation of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg. Later on, in the 1990s, «crimes against humanity» were included in the UN ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Application and interpretation of crimes against humanity by international and national courts keeps raising numerous legal and philosophical questions. One of the controversial issues is the interpretation of crimes constituting crimes against humanity. In this article we seek to look into the problematic aspects related to the conceptualization and application of this category of crimes by national courts.

International Justice • Issue№1(21)