The Pilot Judgment Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights: The Search for the Necessary Balance

Abstract

The article deals with issues related to the modern understanding and application of the pilot judgment procedure of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). It is noted that the pilot judgment procedure changed the distribution of powers between the ECtHR and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe (CMCE) within the framework of the Convention mechanism. In this regard, special attention is paid to finding the necessary balance between the ECtHR, the CMCE and the national authorities in this procedure. The author emphasizes that over the past few years, the pilot judgment procedure has greatly contributed to the development of a dialogue between the Convention bodies of the Council of Europe and national authorities to strengthen the "European architecture for the protection of human rights". The pilot judgment procedure expanded the powers of the ECtHR. In this regard, the author analyzes one of the key issues - the question of the limits of competence of the ECtHR, based on which the latter in pilot judgments can not only recommend, but also prescribe measures of both a general and individual nature, which leads to a change in the balance between the CMCE and the ECtHR established by the Convention. The various factors influencing the development of the pilot judgment procedure are also analyzed. As another important issue in this regard, the author considers whether the European Court participates in the supervision of the execution of its judgments. It is noted that the ECtHR has supervisory functions, deciding on the effectiveness of the created remedy in compliance with the requirements of the pilot judgment. Using the comparative legal method, the author considers the specifics of the pilot judgments of the European Court of human rights, as well as the impact of these decisions on Russian legislation. Statistical data are provided that reveal the impact of the general measures taken on the number of complaints received by the ECtHR about the conditions of detention. The conclusion notes that the pilot order procedure has added a "new dimension" to the tasks of the European Court, as the latter has become involved in overseeing the implementation of pilot judgments and the creation of compensatory remedies. When deciding on requests from the respondent states to extend the time limit for general measures, the European Court also participates in one way or another in the implementation of pilot judgments. The author emphasizes that the effectiveness of both the pilot judgment procedure as a whole and individual pilot judgments depends on many factors, but to a greater extent on the dialogue and search for a balance between the ECtHR, the CMCE and national authorities.