Georgian armed forces targeting Tskhinvali and the surrounding areas. This was followed by other movements of the Sustained Georgian artillery attack on the night of 7–8 August which Ossetia and Abkhazia were (and are) regions in Georgia which are under de factoĬontrol of separatists with ties to Russia. One hand and South Ossetian and Abkhaz separatists supported The case arose from the armed conflict in August 2008 between Georgia on the This section provides some background to and a brief summary of the judgment,įrom which the rest of the article will draw. The contribution concludes with a number of final The interplay between the ECHR and IHL (Part IV) and the procedural duty This contributionĬontextualises the judgment in respect of the issue of jurisdiction (Part III), The judgment is controversial in many respects, and whether it succeeds inīringing clarity, and whether it does so in a convincingīelow, the judgment is explored, starting with a summary of the factual and Obligation to investigate violations of theĬonvention, which, as is explored below, takes on a particularly prominent role. Respect to the interplay of the Convention with IHL.
With respect to the extraterritorial applicability of the The judgment indeed presents a new landmark in the Court’s case law Perspective, the numerous individual victims of the conflict whoīrought their case to the Strasbourg Court may now finally expectīe decided - now that the Grand Chamber has handed down its judgment in Rights regimes, which further raised the question of whether the Court wouldĬourt of Human Rights or whether it would take a different approach. Issues are hotly debated in international law and in the context of To international humanitarian law (‘IHL’).
Right to life must be interpreted in the context of the conduct of hostilities Particular, during international armed conflict (‘IAC’) - theĮxtraterritorial application of the Convention The European Convention on Human Rights (‘ ECHR’) in Issues pertain to the applicability of human rights. With respect to a number of highly contested issues in legal practice and Georgia and Russia in 2008, it was expected Against the background of the brief armed conflict between Judgment in the interstate case Georgia v RussiaĪwaited by many. The European Court of Human Rights’ (‘Court’) Grand Chamber IV The ECHR and International Humanitarian LawīACK? GEORGIA V RUSSIA (II), EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS, APPL.| Feedback Melbourne Journal of International Law Tan, Floris Zwanenburg, Marten - "One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? Georgia v Russia (II), European Court of Human Rights, Appl No 38263/08" MelbJlIntLaw 5 (2021) 22(1) Melbourne Journal of International Law 136
0 kommentar(er)
