Abstract
From its outset the Inter-State Applications procedure was conceived as the most effective means to put an end to human rights violations, guaranteeing compliance with the European Convention of Human Rights. Nevertheless, with time, this remedy has evolved differently from that envisaged by its authors, becoming only a secondary mecha-nism of the Convention. Today, the overwhelming majority of cases before the European Court of Human Rights (hereafter ,, the ECtHR”) are individual applications. Since its creation, the Strasbourg Court has considered thirty State applications, with only eight of them reaching a judgement on the merits. Still, the number of interstate cases currently being referred to the ECtHR demonstrates their growing relevance. In light of the above, this article shall touch upon the reasons and consequences of this phenomenon.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callMore From: Studia Universitatis Moldaviae. Seria Stiinte Sociale
Disclaimer: 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.
