GEORGIA V RUSSIA: JURISDICTIONAL CHAOS AT EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Abstract

The article analyses the European Court of Human Rights’ recent judgment in case of Georgia v. Russa (II). Coupled with its historic relevance the case presents significant developments with regard to issue of extraterritorial application of the Convention. The latter notion has become increasingly important as more States Parties to the Convention engage in cross-border activities and cases that have arisen out of inter-state conflicts are on the rise. The article critically examines the reasoning behind the judgment and attempts to trace the novel standards offered by the court with respect to extraterritorial jurisdiction and arguments put to support it. Hence, the first part will examine the notion of state jurisdiction as developed by the court in its previous case-law, the second part will proceed to apply those principles to the findings of the court and identify deficiencies in its reasoning. The author takes the position that the court was wrong on its assessment of law and facts with respect to extraterritorial jurisdiction during the active phase of hostilities.