About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

23 Harv. Hum. Rts. J. 51 (2010)
The Power of the European Court of Human Rights to Order Specific Non-Monetary Relief: A Critical Appraisal from a Right to Health Perspective

handle is hein.journals/hhrj23 and id is 53 raw text is: The Power of the European Court of Human Rights to Order Specific Non-Monetary Relief: a Critical Appraisal from a Right to Health Perspective Ingrid Nifosi-Sutton* I. INTRODUCTION The remedial practice of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or Court) is hardly known for being innovative or progressive. The reparations the Court uses to remedy violations of the 1950 European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) generally consist of declaratory judgments that establish breaches of Convention rights coupled with, de- pending on the circumstances, damages. Nevertheless, in some instances involving violations of the right to property and the right to liberty and security between 1995 and 2004, the Court has adopted a more proactive, innovative approach to redressing violations by requesting respondent states to provide specific non-monetary relief to victims. This article explores whether the Court's new and bold remedial strategy, aimed at ordering restitutio in integrum and the adoption of legal and admin- istrative measures, has been systematic and whether it has been applied to remedy violations of Convention rights other than the right to property and the right to liberty and security. In doing so, this article takes a right to health perspective. It analyzes whether the ECtHR, between 2002 and 2009, has ordered specific non-monetary reparations concerning violations of the right to health of prisoners and detainees, arising under Article 3 of the ECHR's fundamental prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (hereinafter Article 3). This article begins with an elucidation of the ECtHR's jurisdiction to afford reparations and an analysis of the Court's remedial strategy, high- lighting the Court's willingness to order specific non-monetary relief. It then looks at the protection of social rights under the ECHR and how the Court has interpreted Article 3 to include the right to health of persons deprived of their liberty. From there, this article undertakes a review of the relevant case law under Article 3 to determine: 1) whether the Court has * Adjunct Professor of Law, American University Washington College of Law.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most