AİHS İnfaz Mekanizmasının Etkililiği: Eleştirel Bir Bakış

Year 2025, Volume: 83 Issue: 3, 425 - 445, 15.10.2025

Muhammed Gürkan Gür

https://doi.org/10.30915/abd.1709902

Abstract

Kararların etkili biçimde infazı, Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi’nin işleyişi bakımından yaşamsal önem taşır. Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin kararlarını davalı devletler infaz eder ve onların kararları yerine getirip getirmediğini Bakanlar Komitesi denetler. Her ne kadar tüm kararların yerine getirilmesini sağlayan kusursuz bir infaz mekanizması hiçbir zaman elde edilmeyebilir ise de mevcut mekanizma, var olan birtakım eksikliklere gerçekçi çözümler getirilerek kayda değer biçimde daha iyi hale getirilebilir. Bu bağlamda değinilmesi gereken başlıca hususlar arasında siyasal kaygıların denetim sürecine aşırı müdahalesi, kararın yerine getirilmediği durumlarında harekete geçilmesinin istisnailiği, ihlal prosedürü başlatılmasında ve olası yaptırımların uygulanmasında hukuki öngörülebilirlik olmayışı ve ihlalin yinelenmesini engelleyecek önlemlerin yetersizliği bulunmaktadır. Çözüm önerileri; kararların yerine getirilip getirilmediğinin denetlenmesine yardımcı olup çoğunlukçu olmayan kurumların bağımsızlığını ve etkili katılımını güçlendirmeye, denetim sürecinin olağan ve standart hale getirilmesine ve davalı devletleri ihlali yinelemekten caydıracak usuli güvenceler konmasına odaklanmaktadır.

Keywords

Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi , Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi , kararların infazı , yerine getirmeme , ihlal prosedürü

The Effectiveness of the Enforcement Mechanism of the ECHR: A Critical Overview

Abstract

Effective enforcement of judgments is vital for the functioning of the European Convention of Human Rights. Respondent states enforce the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, and the Committee of Ministers supervises their compliance. Though a perfect enforcement mechanism that ensures compliance with all judgments may never be achieved, the current mechanism may be made considerably more effective with realistic solutions to some of its existing deficiencies. The key issues to be addressed in this context include the excessive interference of political concerns in the supervision process, the exceptional nature of actionability in cases of non-compliance, the lack of legal foreseeability in initiating infringement procedures and applying potential sanctions, and the insufficiency of measures to prevent the recurrence of a violation. The recommended solutions to the identified problems focus on strengthening the independence and effective participation of non-majoritarian institutions assisting with the supervision of compliance with judgments, normalizing and standardizing the supervision process, and introducing procedural guarantees to deter respondent states from repeating a violation.

Keywords

European Convention on Human Rights , European Court of Human Rights , enforcement of judgments , non-compliance , infringement procedure

References

• Baade, Björnstjern. “The ECtHR's Role as a Guardian of Discourse: Safeguarding a Decision-Making Process Based on Well-Established Standards, Practical Rationality, and Facts.” Leiden Journal of International Law 31, no. 2 (2018): 335-61. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156518000110.
• Çalı, Başak, and Anne Koch. “Foxes Guarding the Foxes? The Peer Review of Human Rights Judgments by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.” Human Rights Law Review 14, no. 2 (2014): 301-25. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngu007.
• Çalı, Başak. “The Present and the Future of Infringement Proceedings: Lessons learned from Kavala v Türkiye.” European Human Rights Law Review, no. 2 (2023): 156-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4424579.
• Colandrea, Valerio. “On the Power of the European Court of Human Rights to Order Specific Non-Monetary Measures: Some Remarks in Light of the Assanidze, Broniowski and Sejdovic Cases.” Human Rights Law Review 7, no. 2 (2007): 396-411. https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngm011.
• de Londras, Fiona, and Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou. “Mission Impossible? Addressing Non-Execution Through Infringement Proceedings in the European Court of Human Rights.” The International and Comparative Law Quarterly 66, no. 2 (2017): 467-90. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002058931700001X.
• Fyrnys, Markus. “Expanding Competences by Judicial Lawmaking: The Pilot Judgment Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights.” German Law Journal 12, no. 5 (2011): 1231-60. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2071832200017284.
• Greer, Steven. “Europe.” In International Human Rights Law, edited by Daniel Moeckli, Sangeeta Shah and Sandesh Sivakumaran. Oxford University Press, 2014.
• Greer, Steven. The European Convention on Human Rights: Achievements, Problems, Prospects. Cambridge University Press, 2006.
• Harel, Alon. “The Tension Between the National and ECHR Human Rights Adjudication: A Normative Account.” Human Rights Law Review 24, no. 1 (March 2024). https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngad033.
• Harris, David J., Michael O'Boyle, Ed P. Bates, and Carla M. Buckley. Law of the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford University Press, 2009.
• Lautenbach, Geranne. The Concept of the Rule of Law and the European Court of Human Rights. Oxford University Press, 2013.
• Letsas, George. “The ECHR as a Living Instrument: Its Meaning and Legitimacy.” In Constituting Europe: The European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context, edited by Andreas Føllesdal, Birgit Peters and Geir Ulfstein. Cambridge University Press, 2013.
• Lovat, Henry, and Yuval Shany. “The European Court of Human Rights.” In Assessing the Effectiveness of International Courts, Yuval Shany. Oxford University Press, 2014.
• Paraskeva, Costas. “Reforming the European Court of Human Rights: An Ongoing Challenge.” Nordic Journal of International Law 76, no. 2-3 (2007): 185-216. https://doi.org/10.1163/090273507X225747.
• Pinto de Albuquerque, Paulo, and Anne van Aaken. “Punitive Damages in Strasbourg.” In The European Convention on Human Rights and General International Law, edited by Anne van Aaken and Iulia Motoc. Oxford University Press, 2018.
• Pisillo Mazzeschi, Riccardo. International Human Rights Law: Theory and Practice. Springer, 2021.
• Posner, Eric. The Twilight of Human Rights Law. Oxford University Press, 2014.
• Saladino, Maria Veronica. “The Enforcement of Punitive Damages Awards Between United States and Europe: An Introduction for U.S. Practitioners.” The International Lawyer 52, no. 3 (2019): 469-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3510339.
• von Staden, Andreas. Strategies of Compliance with the European Court of Human Rights: Rational Choice Within Normative Constraints. University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018.
• Other Sources
• Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Recommendation Rec(2004)6 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the Improvement of Domestic Remedies. Adopted May 12, 2004. https://rm.coe.int/16805dd18e.
• Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. Rules of the Committee of Ministers for the Supervision of the Execution of Judgments and of the Terms of Friendly Settlements. Adopted May 10, 2006. Amended January 18, 2017. https://rm.coe.int/16806eebf0.
• European Court of Human Rights. Rules of Court. April 28, 2025. https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/rules_court_eng.