An Examination of International Tribunals' Human Rights Protection and Domestic Binding Power

Abstract

This comparative research is about the role of international courts in human rights protection and the enforceability of their verdicts within the domestic system. It examines the impacts of international judicial protection in relation to constitutional guarantees enshrined in Iraqi law. The study is premised on the idea that the success of international justice is not determined by the issuance of a ruling, but by the ability to protect constitutional rights and the readiness of the national legal system to accept and adopt the ruling. The study shows that the concept of international judicial protection is built upon the independence of the judiciary and the equality principle, as enshrined in Articles 19 and 14 of the 2005 Constitution of the Republic of Iraq. It also shows that the jurisdiction of international courts pertains to fundamental rights affecting life, security, liberty, and asylum, as indicated in Articles 15 and 21 of the same Constitution. Furthermore, the study clarifies that international protection extends beyond personal rights to include civil and political rights, such as nationality and public participation, as outlined in Articles 18 and 20 of the Constitution. The study concluded that the role of international courts is strengthened when it comes to preventing exploitation and trafficking, and protecting freedom of movement and non-refoulement, in accordance with Article 37(3) and Article 44 of the Constitution. However, the effectiveness of this protection remains limited without domestic legislative harmonization. The study further concludes that the domestic binding nature of international rulings rests on a substantive basis—namely, the protection of pre-established constitutional rights—and a procedural basis related to the constitutional and legislative channels governing their implementation and enforcement.