2.2.6 Duty to grant redress and compensate victims
In Assanidze v Georgia,340 the Court reiterated the scope of the State’s obligation
to ensure adequate redress and compensation for victims of ill-treatment:
The European Regional System
2
“A judgment in which it finds a breach imposes on the respondent State a legal
obligation under [Article 46 of the ECHR] to put an end to the breach and to
make reparation for its consequences in such a way as to restore as far as possible
the situation existing before the breach. If, on the other hand, national law does
not allow – or allows only partial – reparation to be made for the consequences
of the breach, Article 41 empowers the Court to afford the injured party such satisfaction as appears to it to be appropriate. It follows, inter alia, that a judgment
in which the Court finds a violation of the Convention or its Protocols imposes on
the respondent State a legal obligation not just to pay those concerned the sums
awarded by way of just satisfaction, but also to choose, subject to supervision by
the Committee of Ministers, the general and/or, if appropriate, individual measures to be adopted in its domestic legal order to put an end to the violation found
by the Court and make all feasible reparation for its consequences in such a way as
to restore as far as possible the situation existing before the breach.”341
The right to compensation therefore goes beyond monetary compensation,
and may even require legislative changes at the domestic level in States Parties
to the Convention.
2.3 Scope of Application
As outlined in section 2.1, an expansive jurisprudence has emerged from the
European Court and Commission of Human Rights defining the prohibited
acts. However, recent developments in the jurisprudence relating to Article
3 have focused not so much upon the definitions of torture, inhuman and
degrading treatment or punishment, which are now well established, but
rather upon the scope of application of Article 3 and, consequently, the extent
of States Parties’ obligations.
2.3.1 The absolute nature of the prohibition of torture
and other ill-treatment
Article 15 of the ECHR provides that the State may never derogate from its
obligations under Article 3, even in times of “war or other public emergency
72
Assanidze v Georgia, no. 71503/01, ECHR 2004-II, judgement of 8 April 2004.
Ibid. §198.
340
341
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents