Make a Submission
Vol. 39 (2019)
General Articles

International Courts, Unrecognised Entities and Individuals: Coherence through Judicial Dialogue?

PDF
  • Anna Czaplińska
Anna Czaplińska
University of Łódź. Faculty of Law and Administration

Published 2021-07-19

Keywords

  • international courts,
  • judicial dialogue,
  • judicial protection,
  • judicial redress,
  • non-recognition,
  • recognition,
  • unrecognised entities,
  • Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus
    • ...More
    Less

Copyright (c) 2021 Polish Yearbook of International Law

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

International Courts, Unrecognised Entities and Individuals: Coherence through Judicial Dialogue?. (2021). Polish Yearbook of International Law, 39, 61-87. https://doi.org/10.24425/pyil.2020.134476

Abstract

The article offers a revisited look at the classic jurisprudence of the ECtHR and CJEU concerning the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus from the perspective of the phenomenon of judicial dialogue. In this context, it aims to examine whether judicial dialogue contributes to the development of coherent jurisprudence and in consequence of effective judicial redress in cases involving unrecognised entities and individuals. It draws attention to the threats for both the international rule of law and the protection of rights of individuals resulting from inconsistencies within own jurisprudence of the respective court, as well as from lack of coherence in interpretation and application of the same rules of international law by different courts.

PDF

References

  1. CJEU judgement in case C-104/16p Council v. Front Polisario, ECLI:EU:C:2016:973.
  2. CJEU judgement in case C-420/07 Meletis Apostolides v. David Charles Orams, Linda Elizabeth Orams, ECLI:EU:C:2009:271.
  3. CJEU judgement in case T-512/12 Front Polisario v. Council (GC), ECLI:EU:T:2015:953.
  4. CJEU judgment in case Brita GmbH v. Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen, C-386/08, ECLI:EU:C:2010:91.
  5. CJEU judgment in case C-420/07 Meletis Apostolides v. David Charles Orams, Linda Elizabeth Orams, ECLI:EU:C:2009:271.
  6. CJEU judgment in case Organisation juive européenne, Vignoble Psagot Ltd v. Ministre de l’Économie et des Finances, C-363/18, ECLI:EU:C:2019:954.
  7. CJEU judgment in case The Queen v. Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte P. P. Anastasiou (Pissouri) Ltd and others, C-432/92, ECLI:EU:C:1994:277.
  8. Council directive 77/93/EEC of 21 December 1976 on protective measures against the introduc-tion into the Member states of harmful organisms of plants or plant products, OJ 1977, no 26, p. 20.
  9. Council regulation (EC) no 44/2001 of 22 December 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, OJ 2001 no 12, p. 1.
  10. Council Regulation (EEC) No 2907/77 of 20 December 1977 on the conclusion of the Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Economic Community and the Republic of Cyprus, OJ 1977, no 339, p. 1.
  11. Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (2001) (text with commentaries), https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/commentaries/9_6_2001.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  12. ECHR (GC) judgment of 1 March 2010 in case Takis Demopoulos and Others v. Turkey (Admissibility) (app. nos. 46113/99, 3843/02, 13751/02, 13466/03, 10200/04, 14163/04, 19993/04, 21819/04), https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-97649%22]} [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  13. ECHR (GC) judgment of 29 January 2019 in case Güzelyurtlu and Others v. Cyprus and Turkey (app. no. 36925/07, https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/spa#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-189781%22]} [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  14. ECHR decision in case Demopoulos and Others v. Turkey (Admissibility), https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-97649%22]} [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  15. ECHR decision of 10 June 2010 in case David Charles Orams and Linda Elizabeth Orams v. Cyprus (app. no. 27841/07), http://www.law.gov.cy/Law/lawoffice.nsf/All/7A0F4837FA7B415DC225742400384BC7/$file/Orams%20v%20Cyprus.Decision.10.06.10.doc [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  16. ECHR decision of 14 March 2005 in case Xenides-Arestis v. Turkey (Admissibility) (app. no. 46347/99), https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-68738%22]} [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  17. ECHR judgment of 10 May 2001 in case Cyprus v. Turkey (Merits) (app. no. 25781/94), https://www.asylumlawdatabase.eu/en/content/ecthr-cyprus-v-turkey-application-no-2578194-10-may-2001 [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  18. ECHR judgment of 18 December 1996 in case Loizidou v. Turkey (app. no. 15318/892), https://www.asylumlawdatabase.eu/en/content/ecthr-loizidou-v-turkey-application-no-1531889-18-december-1996 [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  19. ECHR judgment of 22 December 2005 in case Xenides-Arestis v. Turkey (Merits) (app. no. 46347/99), https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/fre#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-71800%22]} [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  20. ECHR judgment of 24 February 2009 in case Protopapa v. Turkey (app. no. 16084/90), https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/16084-90-protopapa-v-turcja-wyrok-europejskiego-520573276 [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  21. ECHR judgment of 24 june 2008 in case Foka v. Turkey (app. no. 28940/95), https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/28940-95-foka-v-turcja-wyrok-europejskiego-trybunalu-520493881 [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  22. ECHR judgment of 28 June 1996 in case Cyprus v. Turkey (Admissibility) (app. no. 25781/94), http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/?library=ECHR&id=001-3213&filename=001-3213.pdf&TID=thkbhnilzk [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  23. ECHR judgment of 4 April 2017 in case Güzelyurtlu and Others v. Cyprus and Turkey (app. no. 36925/07, https://international.vlex.com/vid/guzelyurtlu-and-others-v-676465333 [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  24. ECHR judgment of 5 March 1995 in case Loizidou v. Turkey (Preliminary objections) (app. no. 15318/892), https://www.refworld.org/cases,ECHR,402a07c94.html [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  25. ECHR judgment of 7 December 2006 in case Xenides-Arestis v. Turkey (Just satisfaction) (app. no. 46347/99), http://www.law.gov.cy/Law/lawoffice.nsf/All/CE1B4C3A6C0225E3C225742400317433/$file/Xenides-Arestis%20v.Turkey%207.12.2006.doc [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  26. EComHR, Report of 4 June 1999 in case Cyprus v. Turkey, https://www.globalhealthrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/EComHR-1999-Cyprus-v.-Turkey.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  27. ICJ advisory opinion of 21 June 1971 in case Legal Consequences for States of the Continued Presence of South Africa in Namibia (South-West Africa), ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 1971, item 16, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/53/053-19710621-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  28. ICJ advisory opinion of 22 July 2010 accordance with international law of the unilateral declaration of independence in respect of Kosovo, ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 2010, item 403, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/141/141-20100722-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  29. ICJ advisory opinion of 9 July 2004 in case legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the occupied palestinian territory, ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 2004, item 136, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/131/131-20040709-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  30. ICJ advisory opinion of16 October 1975 in case Western Sahara, ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 1975, item 12, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/61/061-19751016-ADV-01-00-EN.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  31. ICJ application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, preliminary objections, judgment of 11 July 1996, ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 1996, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/91/091-19960711-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  32. ICJ application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), judgment of 26 February 2007, ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 2007, item 43, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/91/091-20070226-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  33. ICJ application of the interim accord of 13 September 1995(the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia v. Greece) and judgment of 5 December 2011, ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 2011, https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/142/judgments [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  34. ICJ judgment of 30 June 1995 in case concerning East Timor (Portugal v. Australia), ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 1995, item 90, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/84/084-19950630-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf [accessed: 7.07.2021].
  35. ICJ judgment of 5 February 1970 in case Barcelona Traction, Light and Power Company, Limited (Belgium v. Spain), ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 1970, item 3, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/50/050-19700205-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  36. ICJ preliminary objections and judgment of 1 April 2011 in Genocide Convention case; application of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Georgia v. Russian Federation), ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 2011, item 70, https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/case-related/140/140-20110401-JUD-01-00-EN.pdf [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  37. ICJ preliminary objections and judgment of 15 December 2004 in case legality of use of force (Serbia and Montenegro v. Belgium), ICJ Reports of Judgments, Advisory Opinions and Orders 2004, item 279, https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/105/judgments [accessed: 9.07.2021].
  38. Milano E., Recognition (and Non-recognition) of Non-state Actors, [in:] W. Czapliński, A. Kleczkowska (eds.), Unrecognised Subjects in International Law, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, Warszawa 2019.
  39. Milano E., Unlawful Territorial Situations in International Law, Martinus Nijhof, Leiden 2006.
  40. Opinion of advocate General Gulmann of 20 April 1994 in case The Queen v. Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, ex parte P. P. Anastasiou (Pissouri) Ltd and others, C-432/92 ECLI:EU:C:1994:159.
  41. The Vienna Convention on the law of treaties of 23 May 1969, 1155 UN Treaty Series (1969), p. 331-362.
  42. Wyrozumska A., Introduction, [in:] Wyrozumska A. (ed.), Transnational Judicial Dialogue on International Law in Central and Eastern Europe, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego, Łódź 2017, pp. 11-14.
  43. Zaręba S., Responsibility for Acts of Unrecognised States and Regimes, [in:] W. Czapliński, A. Kleczkowska (eds.), Unrecognised Subjects in International Law, Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar, Warszawa 2019, pp. 159-193.
  44. Zaręba S., Specyfika odpowiedzialności za naruszenia Europejskiej Konwencji Praw Człowieka związane z działalnością nieuznawanych reżimów – analiza orzecznictwa [The specific nature of responsibility for violations of the European Convention on Human Rights related to activities of urecog-nized regimes – an analysis of judicial decisions], 3 Studia Prawnicze 27 (2016), https://doi.org/10.37232/sp.2016.3.2.

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.