As a response to widespread structural or endemic human rights violations, in 2004 the European Court began to issue pilot judgments, the aim of which was not only to exert further pressure on national authorities to tackle systemic problems, but also to stop the European Court itself being inundated with the same types of cases. This analyses the principal characteristics of the pilot judgment procedure and its application in key cases to date.
On 31 October, 2008 the Joint Committee on Human Rights (the Joint Committee) published its report Monitoring the Government's Response to Human Rights Judgments: Annual Report 2008 (HL 173/HC 1078). This title sets out the Government's position on the implementation of human rights judgments.
This is the latest in a series of reports to the Joint Committee on Human Rights setting out the Government's position on the implementation of adverse human rights judgments from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and the domestic courts. It covers the period 1 August 2012 to 31 July 2013. The main focus of this paper is on two particular types of human rights judgments: judgments of the ECtHR in Strasbourg against the United Kingdom under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR); and declarations of incompatibility by United Kingdom courts under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998. A feature of these judgments is that their implementation may require changes to legislation,4 policy or practice, or a combination thereof
This is the Committee's second annual report monitoring the Government's response to human rights judgments in the European Court of Human Rights. The Committee criticises the Government for its failure to respond to many of its recommendations in its previous report (17th report session 2006-07, HL 128/HC 728, ISBN 9780104011065). The Committee believes the Government should take a consistent and transparent approach across departments to the way in which it responds to declarations of incompatibility and judgments fro the European Court, with the Ministry of Justice co-ordinating the response to adverse judgments. This report also examines a number of issues arising from outstanding judgments: access to artificial insemination for prisoners and their partners; controlling membership of trade union; prisoners' voting rights; investigations into cases involving the use of lethal force; security of tenure for gypsies and travellers, and the corporal punishment of children.
The Model Rules of Professional Conduct provides an up-to-date resource for information on legal ethics. Federal, state and local courts in all jurisdictions look to the Rules for guidance in solving lawyer malpractice cases, disciplinary actions, disqualification issues, sanctions questions and much more. In this volume, black-letter Rules of Professional Conduct are followed by numbered Comments that explain each Rule's purpose and provide suggestions for its practical application. The Rules will help you identify proper conduct in a variety of given situations, review those instances where discretionary action is possible, and define the nature of the relationship between you and your clients, colleagues and the courts.
Enhancing Parliament's role in relation to human rights Judgments : Fifteenth report of session 2009-10, report, together with formal minutes and written Evidence
In many countries today there is a growing and genuinely-held concern that the institutional arrangements for the protection of human rights suffer from a 'democratic deficit'. Yet at the same time there appears to be a new consensus that human rights require legal protection and that all branches of the state have a shared responsibility for upholding and realising those legally protected rights. This volume of essays tries to understand this paradox by considering how parliaments have sought to discharge their responsibility to protect human rights. Contributors seek to take stock of the extent to which national and sub-national parliaments have developed legislative review for human rights compatibility, and the effect of international initiatives to increase the role of parliaments in relation to human rights. They also consider the relationship between legislative review and judicial review for human rights compatibility, and whether courts could do more to incentivise better democratic deliberation about human rights. Enhancing the role of parliaments in the protection and realisation of human rights emerges as an idea whose time has come, but the volume makes clear that there is a great deal more to do in all parliaments to develop the institutional structures, processes and mechanisms necessary to put human rights at the centre of their function of making law and holding the government to account. The sense of democratic deficit is unlikely to dissipate unless parliaments empower themselves by exercising the considerable powers and responsibilities they already have to interpret and apply human rights law, and courts in turn pay closer attention to that reasoned consideration. 'I believe that this book will be of enormous value to all of those interested in human rights, in modern legislatures, and the relationship between the two. As this is absolutely fundamental to the characterand credibility of democracy, academic insight of this sort is especially welcome. This is an area where I expect there to be an ever expanding community of interest.' From the Foreword by the Rt Hon John Bercow MP, Speaker of the House of Commons
