Human Rights at (Disputed) International Borders: Preliminary Remarks After the ECtHR’s Admissibility Decision in Georgia v. Russia (IV)

On 20th April 2023, the European Court of Human Rights published its unanimous admissibility decision in the Georgia v. Russia (IV) case, adding another ‘brick’ to its ever-growing case law concerning inter-State proceedings. The present inter-State application stems from a set of facts and events whose (il)legality vis-à-vis the European Convention on Human Rights has already been addressed by the Court in its much-criticized judgment on the merits issued in Georgia v. Russia (II). Nonetheless, the case at stake significantly differs from its ‘predecessor’, as it does not address the human rights implications of the hostilities that occurred during the Russo-Georgian armed conflict of 2008 but, rather, considers the human rights consequences of its aftermath. The applicant Government alleged the existence of two administrative practices which violated several provisions of the Convention (Articles 2, 3, 5 and 8 ECHR; Articles 1 and 2 Protocol 1; Article 2 Protocol 4). Setting any future consideration of the merits to one side, with this decision the Court has further delved into various admissibility questions, relating not only to the present case brought by Georgia but to inter-State applications more generally. In view of this, the following analysis will try to shed further light on questions such as the (extra)territorial jurisdiction of States under the Convention, the rule of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies and its application to inter- State cases, and the standard of proof of an administrative practice, among others.