Abstract

The Present Study draws from the observation of some of the problems encountered during the national implementation of Case Law of European Court of Human Rights and proposes - albeit through a selection of cases and national contexts - to identify three models of principled resistance: political resistance, institutional jurisdictional resistance and functional jurisdictional (casuistic) resistance. These models are identified through the analysis of the strategies adopted in some member states of the ECHR, in particular the United Kingdom, Italy and Russia, in order not to implement the decisions of the Court - strategies which cause severe risks for the stability of the system of the Convention.