Abstract
Abstract Whilst the mobilisation practices of human rights organisations before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) have amassed a significant volume of scholarship, the interest in their role in the post-judgement process pales in comparison. This article seeks to contribute to the reversal of this trend by shining a light on Rule 9 of the Rules of the Committee of Ministers, which establishes an official avenue for non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and national human rights institutions (NHRIs) to participate in the execution, as opposed to the litigation, of ECtHR decisions. Since its adoption in 2006, the procedure has led to 882 HRO communications and 346 government responses in 356 different cases. This article offers a qualitative empirical study of them. It argues that these organisations resort to activation, contextualisation and pragmatic strategies in pursuit of one overarching goal: preventing the premature closure of international supervision of a case.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
