The abuse of executive powers: what remedies?
Research output: Contributions to collected editions/works › Contributions to collected editions/anthologies › Research
Standard
Counterterrorism: Democracy's Challenge. ed. / Andrea Bianchi; Alexis Keller. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2008. p. 313-334 (Studies in International Law).
Research output: Contributions to collected editions/works › Contributions to collected editions/anthologies › Research
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - CHAP
T1 - The abuse of executive powers
T2 - what remedies?
AU - Tams, Christian J.
PY - 2008/7/30
Y1 - 2008/7/30
N2 - This paper addresses remedies available to victims of illegal counter-terrorist measures adopted by States. It focuses on judicial remedies and outlines the legal parameters governing recourse to three types of institutions: (i) national courts of the State responsible for the violation; (ii) national courts of other States; and (iii) international (quasi-)judicial bodies, notably human rights courts. It shows that in proceedings before their national courts, States responsible for violations have frequently ignored the victims' human rights to remedies (whether in the form of apologies, compensation or criminal prosecution of perpetrators). Proceedings before foreign national courts, in turn, face considerable obstacles, notably issues of jurisdiction and immunity. While these do not arise in international proceedings, these proceedings are typically dependent on the prior exhaustion of local remedies; what is more, they are time-consuming and often do not lead to binding legal decisions. As a consequence, most victims of human rights abuses committed as part of counter-terrorist operations have not been able to obtain any remedy. This worrying tendency reflects the limited acceptance, in practice, of the international right to a remedy.
AB - This paper addresses remedies available to victims of illegal counter-terrorist measures adopted by States. It focuses on judicial remedies and outlines the legal parameters governing recourse to three types of institutions: (i) national courts of the State responsible for the violation; (ii) national courts of other States; and (iii) international (quasi-)judicial bodies, notably human rights courts. It shows that in proceedings before their national courts, States responsible for violations have frequently ignored the victims' human rights to remedies (whether in the form of apologies, compensation or criminal prosecution of perpetrators). Proceedings before foreign national courts, in turn, face considerable obstacles, notably issues of jurisdiction and immunity. While these do not arise in international proceedings, these proceedings are typically dependent on the prior exhaustion of local remedies; what is more, they are time-consuming and often do not lead to binding legal decisions. As a consequence, most victims of human rights abuses committed as part of counter-terrorist operations have not been able to obtain any remedy. This worrying tendency reflects the limited acceptance, in practice, of the international right to a remedy.
KW - Law
UR - https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/counterterrorism-democracys-challenge-9781841138183/
M3 - Contributions to collected editions/anthologies
SN - 9781841138183
T3 - Studies in International Law
SP - 313
EP - 334
BT - Counterterrorism
A2 - Bianchi, Andrea
A2 - Keller, Alexis
PB - Hart Publishing
CY - Oxford
ER -