Summary
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by a competent national tribunal for acts that violate his or her rights or freedoms.
Obligations
Election Parts
Issues
- The Right to an Effective Remedy, Including Challenging Election Results
- Right to an Effective Remedy for Candidates and Parties
- Right to an Effective Remedy for Electoral Management Body Actions
- Right to an Effective Remedy
- Right to an Effective Remedy and the Media
- Right to an Effective Remedy and Vote Counting and Tabulation
- Right to an Effective Remedy and Voter Education
- Right to an Effective Remedy and Voting Operations
Criteria
- An effective and timely remedy was available for all citizens for violations of their rights throughout the electoral process
- There was a timely and effective means of seeking redress for violations of rights regarding candidacy and campaigning
- An effective (timely and enforceable) remedy was available for all violations of their fundamental rights
- There was an effective means of seeking redress for violations concerning boundary delimitation and the electoral system
- The legal framework provided citizens with an effective (timely and enforceable) remedy throughout the electoral process
- A system to file complaints related to the media was available for all citizens
- The right to remedy was protected throughout the process
- There was a timely and effective means of seeking redress for violations of rights, including regarding voter education
- The state provided an effective (timely and enforceable) remedy to all citizens for violations of their rights, including in the context of voting operations
Quotes
- Each State Party to the present covenant undertakes : (a) to ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms are herein recognized as violated shall have an effective remedy, not withstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity; (b) to ensure that any person claiming such a remedy shall have his right thereto determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, and to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; (c) to ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted.
- States Parties condemn discrimination against women in all its forms, agree to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating discrimination against women and, to this end, undertake…To Establish legal protection of the rights of women on an equal basis with men and to ensure through competent national tribunals and other public institutions the effective protection of women against any act of discrimination.
- States Parties shall assure to everyone within their jurisdiction effective protection and remedies, through the competent national tribunals and other State institutions, against any acts of racial discrimination which violate his human rights and fundamental freedoms contrary to this convention, as well as the right to seek from such tribunals just and adequate reparation or satisfaction for any damage suffered as a result of such discrimination.
- Every woman has the right to the recognition, enjoyment, exercise and protection of all human rights and freedoms embodied in regional and international human rights instruments. These rights include, among others: ...g. The right to simple and prompt recourse to a competent court for protection against acts that violate her rights.
- Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties.
- The States Parties undertake to ensure that the victims of discrimination and intolerance receive equitable and non-discriminatory treatment, equal access to the justice system, expeditious and effective proceedings, and fair compensation in the civil or criminal sphere, as applicable.
- States Parties shall undertake to: a) provide for appropriate remedies to any woman whose rights or freedoms, as herein recognised, have been violated; b) ensure that such remedies are determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities, or by any other competent authority provided for by law.
- Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in this Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.
- Article 25(1) of the Convention establishes, in general terms, the obligation of the States to guarantee an effective judicial remedy against acts that violate fundamental rights. When interpreting the text of Article 25 of the Convention, the Court has stated that the State’s obligation to provide a judicial remedy is not limited to the mere existence of the courts or the formal procedures, or even to the possibility of resorting to the courts, but that the remedies must be effective; in other words, they must provide the person with the real possibility of filing a remedy, in the terms of that provision. The existence of this guarantee “constitutes one of the basic pillars, not only of the American Convention, but also of the rule of law in a democratic society pursuant to the Convention.” Thus, in accordance with Article 25(2)(b) of the Convention, the States undertake to develop the possibilities of the judicial remedy.
- In accordance with article 2, paragraph 3 (a), of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the author with an effective remedy, including reimbursement of the present value of the fine and any legal costs incurred by the author7, as well as compensation.
- For the Court, the requirement that the decision should be founded is not the same as an analysis of the merits of the matter, since this examination is not essential to determine the effectiveness of the remedy. The existence and application of conditions for the admissibility of a remedy is compatible with the American Convention, and the effectiveness of the remedy implies that, when these conditions are complied with, the judicial organ may assess its merits.
- The Court reiterates, having regard to the parties’ submissions which are summarised above, in paragraphs 60 et seq. and 72 et seq., that “the scope of the Contracting States’ obligations under Article 13 varies depending on the nature of the applicant’s complaint; ... the remedy must be effective in practice as well as in law in the sense either of preventing the alleged violation or remedying the impugned state of affairs, or of providing adequate redress for any violation that has already occurred” (see Petkov and Others v. Bulgaria, nos. 77568/01, 178/02 and 505/02, § 74, 11 June 2009). The Court also reiterates that “although no single remedy may itself entirely satisfy the requirements of Article 13, the aggregate of remedies provided for under domestic law may do so” (see Kudła v. Poland [GC], no. 30210/96, § 157, ECHR 2000‑XI).
- The Convention establishes that a person subject to the jurisdiction of the State must have access “to a simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights.” The Court considers that, in the instant case, the dispute between the parties is limited to two of the said characteristics related to the effectiveness of the recourse: (a) whether the alleged victim had access to a recourse, and (b) whether the competent court had the necessary powers to restore the enjoyment of his rights to the alleged victim, if it found that those rights had been violated. The Court will refer to the first of these characteristics as the “accessibility of the recourse” and to the second as the “effectiveness of the recourse.
- Despite the above, the Court considers it pertinent to refer to the Inter-American Commission’s argument that, over and above the fact that the application for amparo was not the appropriate remedy, because electoral matters fell outside its sphere of competence, “effectiveness implies that the judicial body has assessed the merits of the complaint.” In this regard, the Court has established that “the competent authority’s examination of a judicial remedy […] cannot be limited to a mere formality, but must examine the reasons invoked by the complainant and specifically express an opinion on them, according to the parameters established by the American Convention. In other words, it is a minimum guarantee for anyone who files a remedy that the grounds for the ruling deciding it are stated; otherwise the ruling will violate the guarantee of due process.
- The Court observes that, in order to prove the alleged violation of Article 25 of the Convention, both the Commission and the representatives indicated the lack of a simple, prompt and effective remedy for the alleged victim to claim the protection of his constitutional rights. In this regard, the Court considers, as do the Commission and the State, that the application for amparo filed by the alleged victim was not the appropriate remedy in this case, since it was inadmissible in relation to electoral matters.
- Article 2, paragraph 3, requires that in addition to effective protection of Covenant rights States Parties must ensure that individuals also have accessible and effective remedies to vindicate those rights… The Committee attaches importance to States Parties' establishing appropriate judicial and administrative mechanisms for addressing claims of rights violations under domestic law... Administrative mechanisms are particularly required to give effect to the general obligation to investigate allegations of violations promptly, thoroughly and effectively through independent and impartial bodies.
- The Court considers that the meaning of the protection granted by Article 25 of the Convention is the real possibility of access to a judicial remedy so that the competent authority, with jurisdiction to issue a binding decision, determines whether there has been a violation of a right claimed by the person filing the action, and that the remedy is useful to restitute to the interested party the enjoyment of his right and to repair it, if it finds there has been a violation. Indeed, it would be unreasonable to establish this judicial guarantee if the plaintiffs were obliged to know beforehand whether the judicial organ would consider that their situation was protected by a specific right.
- An effective judicial remedy is one, which can produce the result for which it was conceived; in other words, the remedy must be capable of leading to an analysis by the competent court to establish whether there has been a human rights violation and of providing reparation.
- The Court finds that it is not inherently incompatible with the Convention that a State limits the application for amparo to specific matters, provided that it offers another remedy of a similar nature and equal scope for those rights that cannot be heard by the courts using the amparo proceeding. This is particularly relevant as regards political rights, which are human rights of such importance that the American Convention prohibits their suspension, and also of the judicial rights that are essential to protect them (infra para. 140).
- Based on the above, and irrespective of whether the judicial authority declares the claim of the persons who files a remedy to be unfounded, because it is not covered by the norm invoked or should it find that there has not been a violation of the right alleged to have been violated, the State is obliged to provide effective remedies that allow individuals to challenge those acts of authority which they consider violate their human rights established in the Convention, the Constitution and the law. Indeed, Article 25 of the American Convention establishes the right to the judicial protection of the rights embodied in the Convention, the Constitution or the law, and it can be violated irrespective of whether or not there has been a violation of the right claimed or that the situation on which it was based fell within the sphere of application of the right invoked. This is because, like Article 8, “Article 25 of the Convention also embodies the right of access to justice.
- Everyone will have an effective means of redress against administrative decisions, so as to guarantee respect for fundamental rights and ensure legal integrity.
- Tak[e] proactive measures to eliminate all barriers in law and in practice that prevent or hinder citizens, in particular women, persons belonging to marginalized groups or minorities, persons with disabilities and persons in vulnerable situations, from participating fully in effectively in political and public affairs, including, inter alia, reviewing and repealing measures that unreasonably restrict the right to participate in public affairs, and considering adopting, on the basis of reliable data on participation, temporary special measure, including legislative acts, aimed at increasing the participation of underrepresented groups in all aspects of political and public life;
- Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by competent national tribunals for acts violating the rights granted by the constitution, by law or by the Charter, notwithstanding that the acts were committed by persons in an official capacity.
- In the exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the promotion and protection of human rights as referred to in the present Declaration, everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, to benefit from an effective remedy and to be protected in the event of the violation of those rights.
- To the same end, everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, inter alia: (a) to complain about policies and actions of individual officials and governmental bodies with regard to violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms, by petition or other appropriate means, to competent domestic judicial, administrative or legislative authorities or any other competent authority provided for by the legal system of the State, which should render their decision on the complaint without undue delay.
- Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
- Every State has an obligation to ensure that: (i) any person whose rights have been violated, including by persons acting in an official capacity, has an effective remedy by a competent judicial body; (ii) any person claiming a right to remedy shall have such a right determined by competent judicial, administrative or legislative authorities; (iii) any remedy granted shall be enforced by competent authorities; (iv) any state body against which a judicial order or other remedy has been granted shall comply fully with such an order or remedy.
- There will be effective means of redress against administrative regulations for individuals affected thereby.
- Ensure that effective remedies as well as full information about them are available to those who claim that their human rights and fundamental freedoms have been violated; they will, inter alia, effectively apply the following remedies.
- Every person has the right to an effective and enforceable remedy, to be determined by a court or other competent authorities, for acts violating the rights granted to that person by the constitution or by law.
- The participating States further affirm that, where violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms are alleged to have occurred, the effective remedies available include: (11.1) the right of the individual to seek and receive adequate legal assistance; (11.2) the right of the individual to seek and receive assistance from others in defending human rights and fundamental freedoms, and to assist others in defending human rights and fundamental freedoms; (11.3) the right of individuals or groups acting on their behalf to communicate with international bodies with competence to receive and consider information concerning allegations of human rights abuses.
- [Consider] signing and ratifying or acceding to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other core international human rights treaties.
- Tak[e] all necessary measures to eliminate laws, regulations and practices that discriminate, directly or indirectly, against citizens in their right to participate in public affairs on grounds of race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status, or on the basis of disability.
- The General Assembly (...) 6. Calls upon all States: (...) (e) To provide individuals whose right to privacy has been violated by unlawful or arbitrary surveillance with access to an effective remedy, consistent with international human rights obligations.
- Internet service providers should put in place appropriate, clear, open and efficient procedures to respond within reasonable time limits to complaints from Internet users alleging breaches of the principles included in the foregoing provisions. Internet users should have the possibility to refer the matter directly to competent authorities within each member State and be entitled to timely redress.
- There are two possible solutions: - appeals may be heard by the ordinary courts, a special court or the constitutional court; - appeals may be heard by an electoral commission. There is much to be said for this latter system in that the commissions are highly specialised whereas the courts tend to be less experienced with regard to electoral issues. As a precautionary measure, however, it is desirable that there should be some form of judicial supervision in place, making the higher commission the first appeal level and the competent court the second.
- The appeal body must have authority in particular over such matters as the right to vote – including electoral registers – and eligibility, the validity of candidatures, proper observance of election campaign rules and the outcome of the elections.
- All citizens have the right to seek an effective legal or administrative remedy to protect their electoral rights during a campaign.
- The principle of effective investigation is directly linked to the fact that individuals must have accessible and effective remedies in place to protect their political rights.
- The appeal body in electoral matters should be either an electoral commission or a court. For elections to Parliament, an appeal to Parliament may be provided for in first instance. In any case, final appeal to a court must be possible.
- Standing in such appeals must be granted as widely as possible. It must be open to every elector in the constituency and to every candidate standing for election there to lodge an appeal. A reasonable quorum may, however, be imposed for appeals by voters on the results of elections.
- Participants in assemblies must have clear and effective avenues to bring legal action against authorities where their right to freedom of peaceful assembly is infringed, including in cases involving the illegitimate banning or imposing of restrictions on assemblies; violence or retaliations against assembly participants, their family members, journalists or observers; mass surveillance; harassment; and public defamation and smear campaigns.
- Any refusal to disclose information is subject to appeal.
- Candidates, parties, and voters should have the possibility for prompt and effective redress, including through an independent judiciary, in case of violations of law or human rights.
- The election system must provide effective mechanisms and remedies for the enforcement of electoral rights.
- If the electoral law provisions are to be more than just words on a page, failure to comply with the electoral law must be open to challenge before an appeal body. This applies in particular to the election results: individual citizens may challenge them on the grounds of irregularities in the voting procedures. It also applies to decisions taken before the elections, especially in connection with the right to vote, electoral registers and standing for election, the validity of candidatures, compliance with the rules governing the electoral campaign and access to the media or to party funding.
- All citizens have a right to an effective remedy, where their political rights have been infringed or denied. Without the opportunity to seek protection and redress in law, the political rights and freedoms related to elections may be of little value.
- Going beyond the requirements and practices described earlier, some additional best practices for handling election complaints and appeals include the following: The right to an effective remedy.
- Those seeking to exercise the right to freedom of peaceful assembly should have recourse to a prompt and effective remedy against decisions disproportionately, arbitrarily or illegally restricting or prohibiting assemblies.
- Every victim of a human rights violation, including of a violation based on sexual orientation or gender identity, has the right to effective, adequate and appropriate remedies. Measures taken for the purpose of providing reparation to, or securing adequate advancement of, persons of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities are integral to the right to effective remedies and redress.