摘要
本文的目的是分析2013年制定但至今还尚未生效的《欧洲人权公约》第16号议定书内容和潜在的影响。由于该议定书建立了咨询性机制,使得具有终审权力的缔约国法院可以在案件中止期间内向人权法院申请不具有法律约束力的咨询性意见。本文将以比较法的观点为基础,尤其是同美洲人权法院的咨询性机制进行比较,着重从制度设计的角度分析哪些缔约国法院有权提出咨询性意见申请、人权法院会受理何种提问以及咨询性意见具有何种效力或者效果。此外,本文还将重点分析具有咨询性意见对缔约国人权事项的司法与立法体系的影响和转变。
This article focuses on the analysis of the Protocol No. 16 to the European Con- vention on Human Rights, adopted in 2013 and not yet in force. This protocol considerably ex- tends the advisory jurisdiction of European Court of Human Rights, in order to enable the do- mestic courts of last resort of the Contracting Parties to request none-binding advisory opinions from the European Court, in context of a case pending before the requesting court or tribu- nal. Under a comparative point of view, and particularly taking into consideration the inter- American Court of Human Rights advisory mechanism, particular emphasis will be given to some material parameters of new procedure, namely the title to request an advisory opinion, the nature of the questions that the domestic courts may refer to the Strasbourg Court, and the possible effects of these opinions. The analysis will then highlight the impact of the advisory procedure on the role of these regional courts, peculiar judicial authorities of supranational na- ture whose decision can foster the evolution and transformation of the law, even within the Contracting Parties＇ domestic law.
出处
《人权》
2016年第3期109-129,共21页
Human Rights
