Project description
A study of evidentiary regimes in human rights courts
The role of an international human rights (IHR) court is to assess whether a state has breached its human rights obligations. While evidence is at the heart of adjudication, evidence in IHR adjudication has never been studied in a systematic and comprehensive way. The EU-funded DISSECT project will address this gap and clarify the 'messy' IHR evidentiary regime with benefit for the scholarly community and practitioners. It will identify 'best' and 'worst' practices and generate specific recommendations for use in IHR adjudication. Moreover, it will develop new insights and create a new strand in critical legal studies. DISSECT is needed by those seeking international redress without knowing exactly what evidence is required of them as well as by IHR adjudicatory bodies at risk of losing their legitimacy.
Objective
Evidence is at the heart of adjudication, and adjudication at the heart of the international protection of human rights. Yet evidence in international human rights (IHR) adjudication has never been comprehensively studied. Benefiting from the support of highest-level figures in the relevant institutions, DISSECT is a ground-breaking research programme which will capture the evidentiary regimes in place in the world’s three regional human rights courts and in UN human rights quasi-judicial bodies. First, DISSECT will examine from a purely legal perspective the formal and informal rules and practices (‘regime’) which govern the treatment of evidence in IHR adjudication - burden and standard of proof and evidence admissibility, collection, submission, assessment and scope. It will do so across institutions, types of complaints and time. Second, it will examine the political underpinnings and uses of the IHR evidentiary regime, including dismissals of politically sensitive complaints on the pretext that they are not sufficiently evidenced by the victim. Third, it will identify ‘best’ and ‘worst’ practices and generate specific recommendations for use in IHR adjudication. Fourth, it will develop new insights on evidence, truth and power and thus create a new strand in Critical Legal Studies. These ambitious aims will be achieved by harnessing not only legal doctrinal methods of research but also, and crucially, the PI’s rare double training as a lawyer and an anthropologist. This will allow the IHR evidentiary regime to be studied as a social phenomenon (rather than merely ‘in context’). DISSECT is urgently needed by victims of human rights abuse who seek international redress without knowing exactly what evidence is required of them, as well as by IHR adjudicatory bodies at risk of losing their legitimacy if they cannot demonstrate that they are acting logically, consistently and fairly. Current concerns over ‘truth decay’ make it particularly timely.
Fields of science
Not validated
Not validated
Programme(s)
Topic(s)
Funding Scheme
ERC-ADG - Advanced GrantHost institution
9000 Gent
Belgium