CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

METOD ŠPAČEK CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ The part on state immunities has a great potential to be used by practitioners or in legal theory for finding practical solutions to many contradictions that invocation of state immunity entails in application within the domestic legal system, especially before domestic courts. The chapter is somewhat general and theoretical, however may serve as a good basis for future in-depth study of case law of national court and give some concrete suggestions for practitioners with regard to the best way to reconcile controversies stemming of invoking jurisdictional immunities of states. The following chapter is entitled State Immunity versus Individual’s Right to a Fair Trial in the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights . Although there are overlaps between the first parts of this chapter and the previous chapter, this part is much more concise and the handling of the subject is properly streamlined. Main focus of this chapter is on state immunity in case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) with regard to the right to fair trial and access to justice, which is currently heavily debated by practice and theory, including many expectations for evolutionary progress. This makes the topic up-to-date and indeed a contemporary issue. The author gives a brief historical overview of several cases of the ECHR that were relevant for the issue of the relationship of state immunity and human rights. The author engages the ECHR case law with a very interesting and inspiring methodology, sorting them into three categories: 1. well-established exemptions from the immunity as codified in the 2004 UN Convention; 2. invocation of “other” exemptions; 3. invocation of executional immunity. This conceptual approach to the case law analysis gives the structure of the part a strong element of coherence. It has to be highlighted that the author uses a wide range of case law, thus giving the subject study very thorough consideration. A significant part of this chapter is devoted to the issue of interpretation of international law with regard to the Al-Adsani case. The author’s approach is very innovative, however, the author gives too much focus on the explanation of the rules of interpretation and even their development in the context of the work of the ILC. This seems maybe pertinent to the author’s approach to Al-Adsani , but to the reader it might seem redundant. The author goes much in depth into the reasoning of the ECHR in trying to reconcile the concept of State Immunity with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. This thorough analysis, close to a philosophical study, gives unfortunately few answers for the complex legal problem that could be used in legal practice in future cases where state immunity conflicts human rights. Though, and it must be underlined, the chapter in very useful for a good understanding of the overlaying complexities of the Al-Adsani case. The fourth chapter State Immunity of International Arbitration also deals with a pertinent legal question of the relationship of two competing interests, this time between state immunity and the rights of the investor. This is the area of law that has been developing during the last decades in abandoning the concept of unlimited or absolute sovereignty. The author demonstrates deep knowledge of the subject of investment arbitrations and understanding of the wider relationship within international law, including state immunities. The beginning of the chapter gives an outline for a good understanding of the main legal problems involved within the subject covered. It is felt in the chapter that the author is supporting the restrictive concept of immunity, also with an argument of efficiency and fairness. Further,

618