Summary
An effective remedy requires reparation for harm done.
Obligations
Election Parts
Issues
Criteria
- An effective and timely remedy was available for all citizens for violations of their rights throughout the electoral process
- 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
Quotes
- 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.
- 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.
- 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).
- Article 2, paragraph 3, requires that States Parties make reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated. Without reparation to individuals whose Covenant rights have been violated, the obligation to provide an effective remedy, which is central to the efficacy of article 2, paragraph 3, is not discharged....The Committee notes that, where appropriate, reparation can involve restitution, rehabilitation and measures of satisfaction, such as public apologies, public memorials, guarantees of non-repetition and changes in relevant laws and practices, as well as bringing to justice the perpetrators of human rights violations.
- b) The right to an effective remedy includes: (ii) reparation for the harm suffered.
- In general, to be effective, remedies should be capable of discontinuing an ongoing violation, making reparations to individuals whose rights have been violated, bringing to justice perpetrators of the violation and preventing similar infringements in the future.
- The election administration should be legally empowered to take measures that stop any ongoing infringement, restore violated rights, sanction those who violate legislation and prevent similar infringements in the future. Also, the election administration should be required by law to refer any possible criminal matters that come to its attention to the relevant law enforcement body and to forward complaints not under its jurisdiction to the relevant body.
- 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 main guarantee of an effective EDR system is the availability of a remedy that can correct an irregularity by annulling, revoking, modifying or even just acknowledging it. Other mechanisms can either deter or punish a transgressor through a regime of criminal or administrative liability.