РЕШЕНИЯ ДОГОВОРНЫХ ОРГАНОВ ООН ПО ПРАВАМ ЧЕЛОВЕКА КАК ОСНОВАНИЕ ДЛЯ ПРОИЗВОДСТВ В СУДАХ РЕСПУБЛИКИ КАЗАХСТАН

Abstract

The aim of the study is to identify the causes of divergences in the approaches taken by Kazakhstani courts in cases based on the decisions of the United Nations human rights treaty bodies, and to substantiate ways of overcoming them. Applying the formal-legal method and analysing the materials of specific cases considered by Kazakhstani courts on applications submitted by the authors of individual communications, the study establishes that these divergences stem not from differences in the legally relevant circumstances of the cases, but from the absence of a shared understanding of the legal status of treaty body decisions within the national legal system. Since neither international treaties nor national legislation expressly defines the legal force of such decisions, courts are compelled to bridge the resulting gap on their own, which gives rise to inconsistent and contradictory practice and calls into question the observance of the principle of uniformity of judicial practice. The study argues that this uncertainty can be eliminated through the adoption by the Supreme Court of a normative resolution granting such decisions the status of an authoritative legal reference point, subject to good-faith consideration by the courts. Such clarification would foster a unified approach among courts and ensure the uniformity of judicial practice, which in turn would enhance the effectiveness of judicial protection of citizens' rights guaranteed by international treaties.