THE IMPACT OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW ON THE PROGRESSIVE DEVELOPMENT OF CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL LAW. PART II

Introduction. Human rights law has had a powerful influence on general international law. It sets the vector of the progressive development of general international law for decades to come. Under its influence the international community began to perceive and states started to implement national sovereignty in other way and the person acquired many characteristics of international personality. Classical international law began to emerge as the global  transnational law largely due to the fact that Human rights law is the right of result, and also due to non-state, including international judicial, rulemaking, that has assigned to Human rights law selfdevelopment and constant adaptation to the changing needs of social and moral evolution of society.

Materials and methods. Materials used for the analysis include legal works of Russian and foreign researchers in the field of international Human rights law as well as multinational treaties in the sphere of Human rights protection, decisions of UN treaty bodies and judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. Methodological procedures of the research include general and specific scientific methods of enquiry (dialectical method, methods of analysis and synthesis, deduction, induction, comparative-legal and historical-legal methods).

Research results. At some point, many states have ceased to encourage the international judicial activism, for example, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the countries of Eastern Europe and, last but not least, the Russian Federation. Now international judicial rulemaking is accused of limiting freedom of national discretion in struggle against the recent crisis experienced by society due to increased terrorist threats, weakening of international competitiveness, influx of illegal migrants and refugees. In addition, a number of controversial legal positions promoted by international judicial bodies also met opposition.

Discussion and conclusions.  The authors see the possibility to eliminate the growing extremely dangerous and harmful conflict between the states and international judicial bodies in strict adherence to the latest requirements of subsidiarity, restraint, neutrality and political impartiality and in that the international judicial bodies should focus mainly on search for a reasonable and generally acceptable balance between the interests of the individual and society, the individual and the state and between individual rights of different types.

1. Bauring B. Postanovlenie Bol’shoi palaty Evropeiskogo suda po pravam cheloveka po delu “Kononov protiv Latvii” (17 maya 2010 goda): prava li Rossiiskaya Federatsiya v svoem ponimanii sootnosheniya politiki i mezhdunarodnogo prava? [The judgment of the Grand chamber of the European court of human rights in the case “Kononov V. Latvia” (17 may 2010): Does the Russian Federation right in its understanding of the relation of politics and international law?]. – Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie. 2012. No. 2 (3). P. 75–83. (In Russ.)

2. Berkhardt R. Vystuplenie 1 noyabrya 1998 g. Perevod rechi [Speech. November 1, 1998. A Translation]. – Gosudarstvo i pravo. 1999. No. 7. P. 57–62. (In Russ.)

3. Entin M.L. Mezhgosudarstvennyi kontrol’ za ispolneniem reshenii Evropeiskogo suda po pravam cheloveka [Interstate control over the implementation of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights]. – Aktual’nye problemy mezhdunarodnogo grazhdanskogo protsessa. Pod red. Bakhina S.V. [Actual Problems of International Civil Process. Ed. by Bakhin S.V.]. St. Petersburg: SKF “Rossiya-Neva” Publ. 2003b. P. 26–50. (In Russ.)

4. Entin M.L. Spravedlivoe sudebnoe razbiratel’stvo po pravu Soveta Evropy i Evropeiskogo Soyuza [A fair trial according to the law of the Council of Europe and the European Union]. – Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie. 2003b. No. 3. P. 85–87. (In Russ.)

5. Entin M.L., Entina E.G. Vliyanie prava prav cheloveka na progressivnoe razvitie sovremennogo mezhdunarodnogo prava. Chast’ I [The Impact of Human Rights Law on the Progressive Development of Contemporary International Law. Part I]. – Moscow Journal of International Law. 2017. No. 2 (106). P. 29–44. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24833/0869-0049-2017-2-106-29-44

6. Ispolinov A. Ispolnenie reshenii mezhdunarodnykh sudov: teoriya i praktika [Execution of decisions of international courts: theory and practice. International law]. - Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie. 2017. No. 1. P. 45-67. (In Russ.)

7. Ohlin J.D. Theoretical Boundaries of Armed Conflicts and Human Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2016. 418 p.

8. Scheeck L. La diplomatie commune des Cours européennes. – Dans la fabrique du droit européen: Scènes, acteurs et publics de la Cour de justice des Communautés européennes. Editeur scientifique: Vauchez A., Mbongo P. Bruxelles: Bruylant. 2009. P. 105–140.

9. Syudr F. Subsidiarnost’ – “novye ramki” dlya Evropeiskogo suda po pravam cheloveka (o dopolnenii Konventsii Protokolami No. 15 i No. 16) [Subsidiarity is the “new framework” for the European Court of Human Rights (on the supplementation of the Convention by Protocols 15 and 16)]. – Prava cheloveka. Praktika Evropeiskogo suda po pravam cheloveka. 2014. No. 6. P. 6–14. (In Russ.)

10. Tavernier P. Coexistence de systèmes de protection des droits de l’homme en Europe. – La Coexistence, enjeux européens. Editeur: Cao-Huy, A. Fenet. Paris: Puf. 1998. P. 93–109.

11. Zenin A.A. Dopolnitel’nyi protokol No 15 k Konventsii o zashchite prav cheloveka i osnovnykh svobod [Protocol 15 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms]. – Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie. 2014. No. 2 (10). P. 86–98.