ABSTRACT OVERVIEW OF THE COMMENTARY ON PART 1 OF ARTICLE 46 OF THE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS FROM THE BOOK “THE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS. VOLUME II. COMMENTARIES ON

Abstract

On 5 May 1998, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as the ECHR), becoming a component of the legal system of the Russian Federation, introduced into the Russian law a fundamentally new mechanism for ensuring the rights and freedoms of citizens, including a supranational judicial institution - the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which is responsible for all matters relating to the interpretation and application of the provisions of the Convention and the Protocols thereto. This body is intended to be an important mechanism for guaranteeing the guarantees set forth in the Convention, but its international status, which allows the ECtHR to significantly reduce the possibility of influence on the Court by the national authorities, at the same time gives rise to the possibility of improper treatment of the implementation of its decisions at the national level. In addition, in many countries, especially in Eastern Europe, disputes over the limits of the intervention of international bodies in national jurisdiction continue to subside.
In the Russian legal reality, this issue again became relevant after the decision of the European Court of Human Rights in the case "Anchugov and Gladkov v. Russia", which was the basis for the appeal to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation by a group of deputies of the State Duma on the verification of the constitutionality of the provisions of Article 1 of the Federal Law "On Ratification Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Protocols ", paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 32 of the Federal Law" On International Treaties of the Russian Federation ", as well as a number of articles of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the AIC, to the binding, the courts and other state authorities certainly execute ECHR decisions even against the basics of Russian law.
For this reason, it is of interest to analyze part 1 of Article 46 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which establishes the duty of States to implement the final judgments of the ECtHR in cases in which they are parties, as well as the body of the Council of Europe responsible for monitoring the execution process decisions of the ECtHR. This provision, being extremely laconic, does not detail the mechanism for realizing this obligation in detail. But such a mechanism is reflected in the practice of the ECHR itself. Currently, there are many different works on the implementation of the ECtHR judgments and the analysis of the previously mentioned provision of the ECHR, but most of them are either mostly theoretical in nature or, on the contrary, provide an overview of existing practice, which significantly limits their audience and the possibility of applying the knowledge gained.
In this connection, the commentary to Part 1 of Article 46 of the ECHR given in the book "Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms" is extremely useful. Volume II. Comments on articles 19-59 and additional protocols edited by Professor Lech Garlicky. " In this paper, the view of the problem analyzed is not only an outstanding scientist, but also a specialist who is well acquainted with the practical component of this problematic. Lech Garlitsky is a unique researcher who had experience as judges of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Poland (1993-2001) and judges of the ECHR. In addition, the above work provides an opportunity to learn how to look at the problem of the implementation of ECtHR judgments in the Eastern European states that have undergone socio-political changes similar to those in Russia. Moreover, the authors of the commentary analyze the view on the implementation of the ECHR judgments, both from the point of view of the ECHR practice, and from the point of view of the Polish legislation and the national judiciary.