When:
Did you know that Tupiniquim is an agency specializing in corporate communications, institutional and commercial presentations with over 10 years of experience?
We want to be your greatest partner when it comes to convincing the public, creating professional presentations, from the design to the script. Count on our know-how to captivate the public and boost the results of your projects!
The case of Velkhiyev
Russia, a decision of the European Cort of Human Rights (from July 2011), is a very interesting one b2b email list regard to the question of how judges vote in cases involving their national State. In that case, the Court found by six votes to one that Russia had NOT violated Art. 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (prohibition of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment) with regard to 6 of the applicants in the case. The sole dissent on that question was Judge Anatoly Kovler – the Russian judge! He would have the following top 10 lists the municipalities that Russia had violated that provision. So in this case, the judge voted against his State of nationality when the majority would have found in favour of that State. I suspect that this is very rare indeed. So my question today is:
Are there any cases when a judge in an international tribunal has voted against his or her national State or against the party that appointed him or her but where the majority of the tribunal would have found in favour of that State?
For these purposes I would define an international tribunal to include any tribunal in which at least one party to the case is a State. So I include mixed arbitrations, like investment treaty arbitrations. I have to confess that at the time of writing this question, I do not know the answer to it. I would very much like to be enlightened. Perhaps alb directory sort of thing happens more regularly than I imagine it does. Answers in the comments box please!
Just to complete the story with the Velkhiyev
Russia. The Chamber of the ECHR dealing with that case had, unanimously, found Russia in violation of Article 2 of the ECHR (right to life) and in violation of Art. 3 with regard to one applicant.
In this article, you will understand a little more about this strategy and how you can benefit from the naturalness provided by promoting your brand in the media.
