?
General Measures in the Process of Enforcement of International Courts’ Judgments: Between Subsidiarity and Binding Nature
The enforcement of international courts’ judgments, being a special issue of modern international law, raises a number of doctrinal and practical questions. One of these questions concerns possible measures to be adopted for the purpose of the implemen- tation of an international judgment. International courts, by the way of evolutive inter- pretation of their powers following from international treaties, enlarge the practice of recommending the adoption of general measures by Respondent States with a view of preventing repetitive violations of international rules in the future. The combination of general and individual measures is seen as the optimum for the efficient imple- mentation of international judgments. Therefore, the international courts’ powers to recommend the adoption of general measures may be described as an important tool of performing the international courts’ role in global governance. The article focuses on the evolution of general measures in the practice of international courts, primar- ily on the realm of human rights protection with reference to the European Court of Human Rights and other international courts’ and tribunals’ experience such as Inter-American Court of Human. General measures are analysed in the context of the subsidiarity principle and its correlation with expanding powers of international insti- tutions to issue recommendations on how to implement their judgments, as well as with the general assumption of the binding nature of international judgments. Atten- tion is also paid to general measures in the Russian Federation, especially after 2022.