State Responsibility Practices in Case of Human Rights Violation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/06220550Keywords:
European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights, International Law, State Responsibility.Abstract
State responsibility in international law becomes a complex issue even since the mid-twentieth century until today. It is indicated by the absence of binding codification regarding the conception of responsibility of state in international law. Several attempts to codify this convention have been started since 1949 by the International Law Commission (ILC). To date, the final draft recognized is the 2001 ILC Draft which was embraced by the ILC at its fifty-third session, in 2001, and presented to the General Assembly as component of the Commission's report. As a draft, this instrument does not have a legally binding nature. But, international law experts believe that the principles contained are customary international law, especially those relating to states responsibility to human rights violations. This study is normative legal research examining the rules of international law on state responsibilities and human rights. Besides, the novelty of this research is stressing to the practice of state responsibility in factual cases, especially in human rights violation cases. The result of this research is that although the provisions in international law regarding the conception of responsibility of state are still a draft, in practice, several principles in the draft have been implemented by decisions in Regional Human Rights Courts and apply to countries in the regional scope.
Downloads
References
1. Ajeti, A. (2020). The Right to Use Legal Remedies Against Court Decisions in Contested Procedure. Sriwijaya Law Review, 4(1), 9–22. https://doi.org/10.28946/slrev.Vol4.Iss2.428.pp9-22
2. Annalisa, Y., Zaidan, M., Apriandi, M., Febrian, & Nurhidayatuloh. (2019). Aircraft mortgage in Indonesia: Alternative Object of Material Guarantee as a Debt Settlement. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(2 Special Issue 9). https://doi.org/10.35940/ijrte.B1126.0982S919
3. Bambang Sunggono. (1997). Metode Peneitian Hukum. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
4. Bird, A. (2010). Third state responsibility for human rights violations. European Journal of International Law, 21(4), 883–900. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chq066
5. Crawford, J. (2001). The ILC’s Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts: Completion of the Second Reading. European Journal of International Law, 12(5), 963–991. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/12.5.963
6. Crawford, James. (1999). Revising the draft articles on state responsibility. European Journal of International Law, 10(2), 435–460. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/10.2.435
7. Crawford, James. (2002). The ILC’s Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts: A Retrospect. The American Journal of International Law, 96(4), 874–890. https://doi.org/10.2307/3070683
8. Klatt, M. (2011). Positive Obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. ZaöRV, 71, 691–718.
9. Lynch, M. K. (2015). A Theory of Human Rights Accountability and Emergency Law: Bringing in Historical Institutionalism. Journal of Human Rights, 14(4), 504–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/14754835.2015.1032221
10. McCorquodale, R., & Simons, P. (2007). Responsibility Beyond Borders: State Responsibility for
Extraterritorial Violations by Corporations of International Human Rights Law. Modern Law Review, 70(4), 598–625. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2007.00654.x
11. Nurhidayatuloh & Febrian. (2019). ASEAN and European Human Rights Mechanisms, What Should be Improved? Padjadjaran Journal of Law, 6(1), 151–167. https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v6n1.a8
12. Nurhidayatuloh et. al. (2019). Does Limitation Rule in International and Regional Human Rights Law Instruments Restrict Its Implementation? International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(2S9), 597–600. https://doi.org/10.35940/ijrte.B1125.0982S919
13. Nurhidayatuloh, Febrian, Apriandi, M., Y, A., Sulistyaningrum, H. P., Handayani, I., … Tedjomurti,
K. (2020). Transboundary Haze-Free for Southeast Asian Countries by 2020: A Delusional Vision? International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 24(2), 1923–1929. https://doi.org/10.37200/ijpr/v24i2/pr200494
14. Rafael Nieto-Navia. (2015). State Responsibility In Respect of International Wrongful Acts of Third Persons: The Theory of Control. In M. C. Bassiouni, G. Joanna, P. Mengozzi, J. G. Merrills, R. N. Navia, A. Oriolo, … Anna Vigorito (Eds.), The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence Global Trends: Law, Policy & Justice Essays in Honour of Professor Giuliana Ziccardi Capaldo. Oxford: Oxford Scholarship Online.
15. Restu Kartiko Widi. (2010). Asas Metodologi Penelitian Sebuah Pengenalan dan Penuntunan Langkah demi Langkah Pelaksanaan Penelitian. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu.
16. Rick Lawson. (1998). Out of Control State Responsibility and Human Rights: Will the ILC’s Definition of the ‘Act of State’ Meet the Challenges of the 21st Century? In M. Castermans- Holleman, F. van Hoof, & J. Smith (Eds.), The Role of the Nation-State in the 21st Century: Human Rights, International Organisations and Foreign Policy (pp. 91–109). Leiden: Brill | Nijhoff.
17. Rosenstock, R. (2002). The ILC and State Responsibility. The American Journal of International Law, 96(4), 792–797. https://doi.org/10.2307/3070678
18. Sánchez de Tagle, G. (2015). The Objective International Responsibility of States in the Inter- American Human Rights System. Mexican Law Review, 7(2), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1870-0578(16)30005-1
19. Soekanto, S. (2013). Penelitian Hukum Normatif. Jakarta: Rajawali Press.
20. The European Court of Human Rights. (1978). Case of Ireland v. The United Kingdom (Application no. 5310/71).
21. The European Court of Human Rights. (1981). Case of Young, James and Webster v. The United Kingdom (Application no. 7601/76; 7806/77).
22. The European Court of Human Rights. (1983). Case of Van Der Mussele v. Belgium (Application no. 8919/80).
23. The European Court of Human Rights. Hatton and Others v. the United Kingdom (Grand Chamber). , (2003).
24. The United Nations. (1956). Yearbook of the International Law Commission 1949 Summary Records and Documents of the First Session including the report of the Commission to the General Assembly. Retrieved from https://legal.un.org/ilc/publications/yearbooks/english/ilc_1949_v1.pdf
25. Theodor Meron. (1989). State Responsibility for Violations of Human Rights. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), 83, 372–385. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/25658498
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
