IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/irlaec/v76y2023ics0144818823000455.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Non-compliance of the European Court of Human Rights decisions: A machine learning analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Yıldırım, Engin
  • Sert, Mehmet Fatih
  • Kartal, Burcu
  • Çalış, Şuayyip

Abstract

The paper investigates all (971) non-executed pending leading cases of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) between 2012 and 2020 through Machine Learning (ML) techniques. Drawing on the extant scholarship, our interest on compliance has centred on state level and case level variables. For the identification of important variables, four databases have been used. Each country party to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) received 232 distinct factors for eight years. Since we aim to make a parameter estimation for a high-dimensional data set, Simulated Annealing (SA) is employed as feature selection method. In the state level analysis, Support Vector Regression (SVR) model has been applied yielding the coefficients of the variables, which have been found to be important in spelling out non-compliance with the ECtHR decisions. For the case level analysis, different cluster techniques have been utilized and the countries have been grouped into four different clusters. We have found that the states that have relatively high levels of equality before the law, protection of individual liberties, social class equality with regard to enjoying civil liberties, access to justice and free and autonomous election management arrangements, are less susceptible to non-compliance of the decisions of the ECtHR. For the case level analysis, type of violated rights, the existence of dissent in the decision and dissenting votes of national judges for their appointing states affect the compliance behaviour of the states. In addition, a notable result of the research is that if a national judge casts a dissenting vote against the violation judgment of the ECtHR involving the state that appointed him/her, the judgment is likely not to be executed by the respondent state.

Suggested Citation

  • Yıldırım, Engin & Sert, Mehmet Fatih & Kartal, Burcu & Çalış, Şuayyip, 2023. "Non-compliance of the European Court of Human Rights decisions: A machine learning analysis," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:76:y:2023:i:c:s0144818823000455
    DOI: 10.1016/j.irle.2023.106167
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818823000455
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.irle.2023.106167?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Martin Katz & Michael J Bommarito II & Josh Blackman, 2017. "A general approach for predicting the behavior of the Supreme Court of the United States," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-18, April.
    2. Hausladen, Carina I. & Schubert, Marcel H. & Ash, Elliott, 2020. "Text classification of ideological direction in judicial opinions," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    3. Stiansen, Øyvind, 2021. "Directing Compliance? Remedial Approach and Compliance with European Court of Human Rights Judgments," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(2), pages 899-907, April.
    4. Jeffrey K. Staton & Georg Vanberg, 2008. "The Value of Vagueness: Delegation, Defiance, and Judicial Opinions," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 52(3), pages 504-519, July.
    5. Grewal, Sharanbir & Voeten, Erik, 2015. "Are New Democracies Better Human Rights Compliers?," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 69(2), pages 497-518, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emily Hencken Ritter & Scott Wolford, 2012. "Bargaining and the effectiveness of international criminal regimes," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 24(2), pages 149-171, April.
    2. Anthony Niblett, 2018. "Regulatory Reform in Ontario: Machine Learning and Regulation," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 507, March.
    3. Alain Marciano & Antonio Nicita & Giovanni Battista Ramello, 2020. "Big data and big techs: understanding the value of information in platform capitalism," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 345-358, December.
    4. Ian R Turner, 2017. "Working smart and hard? Agency effort, judicial review, and policy precision," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(1), pages 69-96, January.
    5. Shay Lavie, 2017. "Discretionary review and undesired cases," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 265-285, October.
    6. Gauri, Varun & Staton, Jeffrey K. & Cullell, Jorge Vargas, 2013. "A public strategy for compliance monitoring," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6523, The World Bank.
    7. Daniel Berliner & Alex Ingrams & Suzanne J. Piotrowski, 2022. "Process effects of multistakeholder institutions: Theory and evidence from the Open Government Partnership," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 1343-1361, October.
    8. JBrandon Duck-Mayr, 2022. "Explaining legal inconsistency," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 34(1), pages 107-126, January.
    9. Grajzl Peter & Dimitrova-Grajzl Valentina, 2009. "The Choice in the Lawmaking Process: Legal Transplants vs. Indigenous Law," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 615-660, November.
    10. Bokwon Lee & Kyu-Min Lee & Jae-Suk Yang, 2019. "Network structure reveals patterns of legal complexity in human society: The case of the Constitutional legal network," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, January.
    11. Tian, Xiaocong, 2022. "The art of rhetoric: Host country political hostility and the rhetorical strategies of foreign subsidiaries in developing economies," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 57(5).
    12. Daniyal Alghazzawi & Omaimah Bamasag & Aiiad Albeshri & Iqra Sana & Hayat Ullah & Muhammad Zubair Asghar, 2022. "Efficient Prediction of Court Judgments Using an LSTM+CNN Neural Network Model with an Optimal Feature Set," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-30, February.
    13. Sivaram Cheruvu, 2019. "How do institutional constraints affect judicial decision-making? The European Court of Justice’s French language mandate," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(4), pages 562-583, December.
    14. Henrika Langen, 2022. "The Impact of the #MeToo Movement on Language at Court -- A text-based causal inference approach," Papers 2209.00409, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    15. Yang, Guancan & Lu, Guoxuan & Xu, Shuo & Chen, Liang & Wen, Yuxin, 2023. "Which type of dynamic indicators should be preferred to predict patent commercial potential?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    16. Baumann, Florian & Fagan, Frank, 2023. "When more isn’t always better: The ambiguity of fully transparent judicial action and unrestricted publication rules," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    17. Renáta Németh, 2023. "A scoping review on the use of natural language processing in research on political polarization: trends and research prospects," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 289-313, April.
    18. Erik Voeten, 2017. "Competition and Complementarity between Global and Regional Human Rights Institutions," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(1), pages 119-123, February.
    19. Justin Fox & Georg Vanberg, 2014. "Narrow versus broad judicial decisions," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 26(3), pages 355-383, July.
    20. Andreas J. Ullmann & Andreas von Staden, 2024. "A Room Full of ‘Views’: Introducing a New Dataset to Explore Compliance with the Decisions of the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies’ Individual Complaints Procedures," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 68(2-3), pages 534-561, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:76:y:2023:i:c:s0144818823000455. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/irle .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.