Abstract
This article analyses both cooperative and confrontational interactions between domestic judges and UN human rights treaty monitoring bodies. Based on a number of cases collected through multiple databases, this article addresses the basis on which the monitoring bodies encourage the domestic acceptance of their views, general comments, and reports; how domestic courts engage with these findings; on what basis; and why some courts are more willing to engage with these findings. A key argument is that judicial accommodation is highly selective; domestic judges occasionally avoid, discount, and contest the interpretation put forward by the treaty monitoring bodies and thereby pose a challenge to their legitimacy.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 201-232 |
| Number of pages | 32 |
| Journal | International and Comparative Law Quarterly |
| Volume | 67 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Jan 2018 |
Keywords
- bindingness
- domestic courts
- Human Rights Committee
- persuasiveness
- UN human rights treaty monitoring bodies