<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<export-example>
  <doc>
    <id>2743</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2018</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>eng</language>
    <pageFirst>1978</pageFirst>
    <pageLast>2006</pageLast>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue>7</issue>
    <volume>19</volume>
    <type>article</type>
    <publisherName/>
    <publisherPlace/>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>0</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>2019-01-31</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="eng">Judicial Self Government and the Sui Generis Case of the European Court of Human Rights</title>
    <parentTitle language="eng">German Law Journal</parentTitle>
    <identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:kobv:b1570-opus4-27434</identifier>
    <licence>Metadaten / metadata</licence>
    <author>Başak Çalı</author>
    <submitter>Başak Çalı</submitter>
    <author>Stewart Cunningham</author>
    <collection role="HertieResearch" number="">Centre for Fundamental Rights</collection>
    <thesisPublisher>Hertie School</thesisPublisher>
    <file>https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-hsog/files/2743/Başak,Çalı and Stewart Cunningham 2018_GLJ_Vol_19_No_7.pdf</file>
  </doc>
  <doc>
    <id>3468</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2020</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>eng</language>
    <pageFirst>355</pageFirst>
    <pageLast>384</pageLast>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue>21</issue>
    <volume/>
    <type>article</type>
    <publisherName/>
    <publisherPlace/>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>0</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>2020-05-13</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="eng">Hard Protection through Soft Courts? Non-Refoulement before the United Nations Treaty Bodies</title>
    <abstract language="eng">This Article comparatively analyses how the prohibition of refoulement is interpreted by United Nations Treaty Bodies (UNTBs) in their individual decision-making, where we suggest they act as “soft courts.” It asks whether UNTBs break ranks with or follow the interpretations of non-refoulement of the European Court of Human Rights. This investigation is warranted because non-refoulement is the    single most salient issue that has attracted individual views from UNTBs since 1990. Moreover, our European&#13;
focus is warranted as nearly half of the cases concern states that are also parties to the European Convention on Human Rights. Based on a multi-dimensional analysis of non-refoulement across an&#13;
original dataset of over 500 UNTB non-refoulement cases, decided between 1990–2020, as well as pertinent UNTB General Comments, the Article finds that whilst UNTBs, at times, do adopt a more&#13;
progressive position than their “harder” regional counterpart, there are also instances where they closely follow the interpretations of the European Court of Human Rights and, on occasion, adopt a more&#13;
restrictive position. This analysis complicates the view that soft courts are likely to be more progressive interpreters than hard courts. It further shows that variations in the interpretation of non-refoulement in a crowded field of international interpreters present risks for evasion of accountability, whereby domestic authorities in Europe may favor the more convenient interpretation, particularly in environments hostile to non-refoulement.</abstract>
    <parentTitle language="eng">German Law Journal</parentTitle>
    <identifier type="doi">doi:10.1017/glj.2020.28</identifier>
    <identifier type="issn">2071-8322</identifier>
    <licence>Metadaten / metadata</licence>
    <author>Başak Çalı</author>
    <submitter>Nadja Starke</submitter>
    <author>Cathryn Costello</author>
    <author>Stewart Cunningham</author>
    <collection role="HertieResearch" number="">Centre for Fundamental Rights</collection>
    <thesisPublisher>Hertie School</thesisPublisher>
  </doc>
  <doc>
    <id>3788</id>
    <completedYear/>
    <publishedYear>2021</publishedYear>
    <thesisYearAccepted/>
    <language>eng</language>
    <pageFirst/>
    <pageLast/>
    <pageNumber/>
    <edition/>
    <issue/>
    <volume/>
    <type>bookpart</type>
    <publisherName>Oxford University Press</publisherName>
    <publisherPlace/>
    <creatingCorporation/>
    <contributingCorporation/>
    <belongsToBibliography>0</belongsToBibliography>
    <completedDate>2021-03-19</completedDate>
    <publishedDate>--</publishedDate>
    <thesisDateAccepted>--</thesisDateAccepted>
    <title language="eng">The European Court of Human Rights and Removal of Long-Term Migrants: Entrenched Statism with a Human Voice?</title>
    <parentTitle language="eng">Migration and the European Convention on Human Rights</parentTitle>
    <enrichment key="opus.source">publish</enrichment>
    <licence>Metadaten / metadata</licence>
    <author>Başak Çalı</author>
    <submitter>Nadja Starke</submitter>
    <editor>Başak Çalı</editor>
    <author>Stewart Cunningham</author>
    <editor>Ledi Bianku</editor>
    <editor>Iulia Motoc</editor>
    <collection role="HertieResearch" number="">Centre for Fundamental Rights</collection>
    <thesisPublisher>Hertie School</thesisPublisher>
  </doc>
</export-example>
