THE ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGEMENTS IN INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COURT

It is a well-known fact that international law has not been at its strongest when it comes to its implementation and enforcement, since there is not coercive power in the international system comparable to that which enforces domestic law. However, the judgments of international courts and tribunals must attain full respect by the Member States, thereby sending a credible message that there are consequences for non-compliance. This thesis focuses on how to persuade and pressure a delinquent State into compliance with the judgments in the European, Inter-American and African Courts of Human Rights and identifies the elements constituting an effective mechanism for the enforcement of judgments based on a comprehensive and comparative study of the related legal provisions and practice. It demonstrates that these three human rights courts adopt the same method: supervision without prospect of sanctions, mainly because different dynamics operate in the area of international human rights law. A comparison between the international human rights courts and some other international judicial organs, including the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of Sea, the WTO dispute settlement mechanism and the European Court of Justice with regard to the enforcement of judgments shows that the latter ones rely on coercive measures to ensure compliance and the achievements of the human rights court is inspiring for them on how to enhance their effectiveness. The last part of this study addresses the prospect of establishing an international human rights system in the Asian region based the analysis of the current obstacle from its creation, which now seems more likely on the sub-regional level and provides proposals on the future mechanism for the enforcement of judgments.