Text in Afrikaans / Artikel 35(5) van die Grondwet 108 van 1996 handel oor die uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis en bepaal dat sodanige getuienis uitgesluit moet word indien toelating daarvan sal lei tot 'n onbillike verhoor of tot nadeel sal strek vir die regspleging. Uit die bewoording van die artikel blyk dit dat die howe geen diskresie het ten opsigte van die toelaatbaarheidsvraag nie en 'n streng uitsluitingbenadering moet volg. Die doel van hierdie verha• ndeling is om ondersoek in te stel na die mate van diskresie .en die wyse ·waarop diskresie toepas word in hierdie besluitnemingsproses. Twee benaderings is deur die howe gevolg, naamlik 'n benadering waar 'n wye diskresie uitgeoefen word en 'n benadering waar 'n beperkte diskresie uitgeoefen word, dus 'n gekwalifiseerde uitsluitingsbenadering. Die skrywer doen aan die hand dat beide gronde vir uitsluiting van belang is en dat die howe verkeie faktore moet oorweeg ten einde 'n beslissing te vel oor die insluiting of uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis. 'n Balans moet dus gehandhaaf word tussen die belang van die beskuldigde op 'n billike verhoor en die belang van die gemeenskap daarin dat regspleging nie benadeel moet word nie en dat reg en geregtigheid moet geskied / Section 35(3) of the Constitution Act 108 of 1996 deals with the exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence and stipulates that such evidence must be excluded if the admission would render the trial unfair or be detrimental to the administration of justice. From the wording of the section it seems that the courts have no jurisdiction in regard to the admissibility question and that a strict exclusionary approach must be followed. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the amount of discretion that the Courts have, and the manner in which this discretion is applied in the process of decision making. Two approaches were followed by the courts namely a wide discretionary approach and an approach where a strict discretion was applied. It is submitted that botR grounds for exclusion are of importance and that the courts must consider a variety of factors in deciding the question on the inclusion or exclusion of unconstitutionally obtained evidence. A balance must be struck between the interest of the accused in a fair trial and the interest of the community that the administration of justice must not be prejudiced and that justice must prevail. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)

The purpose of this study is to investigate the sentencing practice of the military courts. Since an independent and impartial military judiciary is essential to ensure that justice is done a further aim of this study is to investigate whether the military courts are impartial, independent and affords the accused his fair trial rights. The sentences imposed by military courts are investigated and concerns regarding the imposition of these sentences are identified. Finally the appeal and review procedures followed by the military courts are investigated with specific reference to the military accused’s right appeal and review to a higher court as provided for by the Constitution. The sentencing phase of a trial forms an important part of the whole trial process. This is also true for military trials, yet no research has been done on military sentencing practice. Because of the potential influence of the draft Military Discipline Bill and the Law Reform Commission’s revision of the defence legislation on sentencing, research in this area is critical in the positive development of sentencing law in the military justice environment. An extensive literature study is undertaken to evaluate current military sentencing practices against civilian practices. The result of this study identifies certain concerns regarding the independence of the military courts, the treatment of military offenders and the appeal and review powers of the military reviewing authority. To a large extent it is also found that many concerns are based on the apparent rather than the existence of any real dangers to the independence of the military courts or the rights of the military accused. This thesis contributes to the accessibility of military law for a civilian audience, creating a platform for the development of future military sentences. / Jurisprudence / LLD

Summaries in English and Afrikaans / Text in Afrikaans / In the past, witness statements obtained by or on behalf of a party to a criminal case were protected, from disclosure to the opponent, by privilege. The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate whether such claims to privilege are justified and whether openness before and during the trial is not perhaps more important to the interests of justice. The disclosure of witness statements to the defence is a commonly recognized practice all over the world. This practice enhances openness before and during the criminal trial. The arguments against and in favor of such a practice are many, but investigation into these has shown that it is in the interests of justice to disclose such statements to the defence, rather than to deny access. Furthermore, the writer investigates whether it would be in the interests of justice to compel the defence to assist the court in determining the truth. / In die verlede is getuieverklarings wat deur of ten behoewe van 'n party tot 'n strafsaak bekom is deur privilegie beskerm, teen openbaarmaking aan die teenstander. Verskeie argumente is aangevoer om die beroep op getuieverklaring privilegie te regverdig. Die doel van hierdie verhandeling is om ondersoek in te stel of sulke aansprake geregverdig is en of openheid voor en gedurende die verhoor nie meer belangrik vir die belang van geregtigheid is nie. Die openbaarmaking van getuieverklarings aan die verdediging is 'n algemeen erkende praktyk regoor die wereld. Hierdie praktyk bevorder openheid voor en tydens die strafverhoor. Die argumente vir en teen so 'n praktyk is baie en 'n ondersoek daarvan dui daarop dat dit in die belang van geregtigheid is om sulke verklarings aan die verdediging te openbaar, eerder as om toegang daartoe te weier. Die vraag is nou of dit nie ook in die belang van geregtigheid is dat die verdediging verplig word om die hof by te staan om die waarheid vas te stel nie. Ten slotte het die skrywer aan die hand gedoen dat partye tot 'n straf saak getuieverklarings gelyktydig voor die verhoor uitruil en ondersoek ingestel of so 'n praktyk in ooreenstemming met die Grondwet van Suid-Afrika 108 van 1996 kan wees. / Law / LL.M.

Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2005. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In 2002 the South African Law Commission published a report in which amendments to the existing rules of criminal procedure and evidence were proposed. A number of these recommendations have since been included in a Bill that was tabled before Parliament in 2003. The proposed amendments largely reflect values which underlie the "Victims' Rights" movement. The aim of this thesis is to consider the possible influence of these amendments on the constitutionally guaranteed fair trial rights of the accused. The study focuses on those amendments that play a role in the prosecution of alleged sexual offences against children, and shows that although the recognition of victims' rights is important, it should not be done at the expense of a fair trial. Dangers inherent to the proposed amendments are therefore highlighted. The rights of the accused are used to test the desirability or not of the proposed amendments. Foreign authority is used to support the argument made in the thesis. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: In 2002 het die Suid-Afrikaanse Regskommissie 'n verslag gepubliseer waann veranderings aan die huidige strafprosesreg- en bewysregreëls voorgestel word. 'n Aantal van hierdie voorgestelde wysigings is intussen opgeneem in 'n Wetsontwerp wat in Augustus 2003 voor die Parlement gedien het. Die voorgestelde wysigings reflekteer tot 'n groot mate waardes wat die "Victims' rights" beweging onderlê. Die doel van hierdie tesis is om die moontlike invloed van hierdie wysigings op die grondwetlik verskanste billike verhoor regte van die beskuldigde te ondersoek. Die ondersoek fokus op daardie veranderinge wat 'n rol speel in die vervolging van beweerde geslagsmisdade teen kinders. Daar word aangetoon dat alhoewel die erkenning van regte vir slagoffers belangrik is, dit nie ten koste van 'n regverdige verhoor gedoen kan word nie. Gevare verbonde aan die voorgestelde wysigings word dus uitgewys. Die regte van die beskuldigde word deurgaans gebruik om die wenslikheid al dan nie van die voorgestelde wysigings aan te toon. Buitelandse gesag word aangewend om die betoog te ondersteun.

本論文論述公正程序請求權在民事證據法上各主要議題之作用，重點論之如下： 「公正程序請求權理念之建立」，係為探討公正程序請求權之內涵與意義，以鋪陳應用該概念於與民事證據法關係密切之證據調查、事實認定過程之基礎。藉由歐洲人權法院相關判決，以印證歐盟司法機關對公正程序請求權在基本人權脈絡下之意涵及其在實際個案之解釋適用。另亦探討法律安定性與公正程序請求權之關係。因以公正程序請求權為前導法理所指向之程序內涵之一為實質公平正義的追求。建基於此目標，為使程序法注入新理論概念而與憲法層次之價值觀相連接，因此在立法論指向積極擴大「不確定法律概念」的立法應用，使司法裁量(Ermesson)於民事證據法的解釋、適用判斷空間於焉擴張，若對不確定法律概念的規範特質、規範目的不予釐清，而汎用於事實認定與證據調查程序中，同時司法裁量的運作空間在解釋論上，其寬窄勢必增加法官就其裁量判斷對當事人發生「突襲性裁判」之機會。以此對照同為法治國原則所衍生之法律安定性、法律明確性原則等之內在限制要求，不確定法律概念之指涉範圍則與之形成對立緊張關係。不確定法律概念是否應予限定，又如何與審判實務相銜接，其如何在「法官恣意禁止原則」下踐行，實值評估。值注意者為德國法學者關於法治國原則之正當程序及不確定法律概念之討論，其解釋論取向實值深思。 關於舉證責任之分配，我國新修正民事訴訟法第二百七十七條規定：「當事人主張有利於己之事實，就其事實有舉證之責任。但法律別有規定，或依其情形顯失公平者，不在此限。」本條規定為德、日所無，而係我國所獨創。針對此舉證責任所設之通則規定，於審判實務上以公正程序保障之觀點以言，是否能臻至法律明確性之要求，而具體落實為操作性規則(Operations Regeln)，實不無疑義。如何於訴訟階段運用該條規定以合理分配敗訴之風險，以及建立一明確而穩固之舉證責任分配原則乃直接衝擊當事人訴訟勝敗，在「原則-例外」脈絡下，如何保障當事人公正程序請求權，防免法律突襲，實有賴舉證責任分配一般原則之確立。另蒐集美國判決以觀察common law之舉証責任分配其原則是否以衡平原則為依據。此外，闡明權行使在實質上賦予法官介入個案調整紛爭當事人訴訟程序相對地位之職權。惟由於程序安定性之要求既在保護人民對於訴訟程序之信賴，如何保護實體權利、實現正義，均應依正當程序解決兩造糾紛始有可能為當事人及利害關係人等所信服，則闡明權如何平衡兼顧兩造利益，以維法官之中立；對以法尋求說做為程序目的論者而言，又如何平衡兼顧實體利益與程序利益，實值探討。而藉由對於闡明權行使之分析，以理解其為何引起法律適用的困難，以致於在司法審查密度、心證公開的決定上會成為一個有意義的問題。為促進訴訟，更進一步是否應將事案解明義務一般化?又如何於訴訟階段以一般化事案解明義務為基礎，使當事人盡力於證據之提出及其可期待性? 於充分賦予當事人公正程序保障之前提下，如何使當事人之證據提出責任具體化，為所關心之課題。 舉證責任減輕之體系定位之釐清將有助於解析整個事實認定之過程，在「原則-例外」基本原理的體系脈絡下，為達公正程序請求權所保障之實質公平，構成舉證責任減輕之事件類型，正當性及所採取之種類方式，其法理基礎均為關切之重點。現代科技文明，非但對自然生活環境帶來一定衝擊，更直接影響現代型紛爭、訴訟之蓬勃發展。文獻上對以公害、醫療、交通、產品責任等現代型訴訟為例，已累積相當成果。對受害人因欠缺得與財團企業、專門職業從業者相抗衡之專業知識與經濟實力，若需就其行為與「損害」間之因果關係負擔客觀舉証責任，實近於緣木求魚。則於訴訟法上應如何透過舉證責任減輕以減輕訴訟中弱勢原告之証明負擔，調整雙方不對等之訴訟地位以落實訴訟法上之「武器平等原則」，及損害賠償數額確定之舉證責減輕，究是否等同於衡平裁判之問題，實極有討論價值。另論述美國學者John Rawls提出之正義論做為平等原則在證據法操作性規則之可能性，及德國學者Prütting對勞動法證明責任之見解，對於經濟上弱勢地位之勞工與資本家間勞資爭議事件之探討深具啟發性。 「證據蒐集與事實認定之公正程序保障」，探討關於證據資料蒐集及各種證據方法之提出，在證據調查程序上各有何特性，又應如何保障公正程序之審理過程。訴訟對立之兩造，其實體利益及程序利益之消長在事實認定、證據價值判斷上決定勝敗，依此觀點下兩造之利害關係成為零合賽局，而非相互協助合作。證據蒐集方法中文書提出義務、協力義務等主張亦處於類似之狀況，則其以公正程序觀點檢視其範圍、正當性與界限，實有必要。 違法取得證據資料之證據能力部份，討論因科技發展帶動新穎證據方法之出現，使證據資料之取得來源益趨多元，如何決定新穎科學證據所應採之正當調查程序，對於我國社會徵信公司、討債公司林立之現況，自有其實證研究價值。就民事程序中負舉證責任人或第三人之違法取得證據，例如以電話竊聽，私下錄音或其他文件之竊取、未經同意之照片拍攝錄影、潛入工廠生產線以取得證據資料證明製程專利侵權等，產生追求真實之訴訟目的觀與程序或實體法規範衝突之情形，尚且擴及憲法之價值確立與衝突之問題。依正當程序及其他憲法原則之審判應如何合宜審度裁酌方得認定證據資料之證據能力，又如何忠實反映該新種證據方法所表彰之證據價值等，甚值注目。申言之，取得證據資料與其他基本權，如隱私權、人性尊嚴、人格權、財產權、自由權等價值之相互間對抗與衡量。 對於證據蒐集，一般認為，大陸法系與英美法系在證據蒐集程序上相異處之一在於摸索證明之原則准否。而評估我國是否容許類似英美法系之事證開示制度(Discovery or Disclosure)，學者間爭議頗多。而在德國，學說及實務上有以辯論主義作為承認摸索證明禁止原則之理論依據者，而通說亦向來將摸索證明之許可性討論置於適用辯論主義之程序中為之。以程序制度之原則一貫性而言，是否應原則禁止，例外准許。而可能例外准許類型之範圍及考量因素為何，其程序態樣，及其法理基礎為觀察重點。摸索證明是否應與准許，對訴訟對立之兩造，影響至巨，而有與公正程序所要求之當事人具體化義務，證據聲明明確性等標準相衝突之虞。證據評價為另一論述重點，所蒐集之證據在自由心証下如何為證據評價本文襲承證據法學說對證明度等基礎概念之討論，說明關於何種證據方法、證據資料得成為法院事實認定之素材，即具證據能力及經嚴格證明，而對於解明事實而言又有多大助益（亦即證據價值）證據相關性(或關連性)問題與證明預斷之禁止原則等，凡此種種議題因均與法院認定事實之過程息息相關，誠有檢討實益與必要。 擬制自認與失權制度之公正程序保障部份，鑑於訴訟制度為一集團現象，司法資源有限，課紛爭當事人以訴訟促進義務，以達防止訴訟延滯、簡化爭點、審理集中化之目標，並賦予違反此義務者以失權之法律效果，對程序利益保護雖為一有效手段；然因其剝奪當事人進行攻擊防禦之機會，認定事實之基礎並非在於當事人積極而經自由意志判斷之訴訟行為，則在如何之法理支持下，乃能正當化此強制處分對擬制自認、遲延提出攻擊防禦方法之失權與其他程序上異議(責問)失權等所造成當事人程序及實體權利不利益之科處，實值深究。在審判實務上，對於擬制自認之運用，解釋適用之疑難。例如，對於所謂「不爭執」之定義、及擬制自認之效力等基本問題之疑義、沉默的證據力等為其著例。在證據調查或準備程序之爭點整理階段，公正程序權利如何保障以無悖於法治國之憲法原則，為著力關切點。

Litigation in person is a widespread phenomenon in common law jurisdictions. A right to litigate in person is treated as a fundamental right, regardless of whether the litigant has the financial means to hire a lawyer or the capacity to conduct litigation effectively. Due to the high numbers of litigants in person and the various burdens placed on judicial resources by their lack of legal knowledge, they pose a serious challenge to the effective and efficient administration of justice. This thesis assesses the theoretical value of a right to self-representation, and challenges the position that courts should not impose legal representation on a litigant nor require him to obtain such representation as a condition for litigation. It argues that a litigant who lacks the professional knowledge and skills to present his case effectively cannot legitimately insist upon representing himself if in doing so he is likely to inflict disproportionate costs on his opponent and on the administration of justice. This thesis advances the case for mandatory representation in civil proceedings on three main fronts: a comparison with the criminal context, an assessment of the value of self-representation in terms of outcome, and an examination of its possible intrinsic justifications.

Le présent mémoire se penche sur la constitutionnalité des articles 517 et 539 C.cr., qui prévoient des ordonnances de non-publication à l'enquête sur mise en liberté provisoire ainsi qu'à l'enquête préliminaire. L'auteur présente d'abord les modalités d'application de chacune de ces ordonnances. Suit ensuite un portrait de la jurisprudence sur la constitutionnalité de ces deux dispositions. L'auteur applique par la suite aux dispositions le test élaboré dans l'arrêt Oakes. Il conclut que l'objectif des dispositions, qui consiste à assurer un procès équitable à l'accusé, est urgent et réel. L'auteur constate ensuite que le critère du lien rationnel n'est pas satisfait puisque, ordonnance ou pas, les informations préjudiciables pour un accusé seront de toute façon dispersées dans le public, notamment grâce aux nouvelles technologies de l'information. À défaut de profiter d'informations fiables retransmises par les médias, le public devra se concentrer sur les rumeurs non vérifiables propagées par le Web. Le critère de l'atteinte minimale est également examiné. L'auteur estime que ni les récusations motivées, ni le changement de venue, ni les directives aux jurés ne sont en mesure de remplacer des ordonnances de non-publication. Enfin, l'auteur estime que les articles 517 et 539 C.cr. échouent le critère de proportionnalité entre les effets préjudiciables et les effets bénéfiques. En conclusion, comme alternative aux interdits de publication, l'auteur propose une réforme du processus de récusations motivées. / This thesis examines the constitutionality of sections 517 et 539 of the Criminal Code, which permits the judge presiding over a bail hearing or a preliminary inquiry to impose a publication ban. The author explains the way these bans are applied. He then reviews the existing case law regarding the constitutionality of these sections of the Criminal Code. In the second part of his thesis, the author applies the Oakes test to both sections. He first deals with the contextual factors to be considered in the analysis. He then examines the objective of the sections, which is to protect the right of the accused to a fair trial. He concludes that this objective is pressing and substantial. On the other hand, the rational connection test is not satisfied, because even with a ban, the prejudicial information will still be transmitted to the public through new technologies such as the Internet. If no information is allowed to be published by the journalists, the public will have to rely solely on rumours and possibly false news circulating on the Web. The minimal impairment test is also examined. Neither challenge for cause, nor change of venue or judicial instructions can replace effectively publication bans. Applying the last part of the Oakes test, the author fails to find that the deleterious effects of publication bans are proportionate to their salutary effects. In conclusion, the author briefly proposes a reform of the challenge for cause process.

Face aux préjudices irréparables engendrés par les crimes internationaux, le droit international, hormis les cas de poursuites devant la CPI et la pratique des commissions et fonds d'indemnisation des N.U, fait ponce-Pilate au droit interne pour la mise en oeuvre du droit à réparation des victimes de ces crimes. Une hypocrisie qui s'affirme notamment à travers des pratiques d'assistance humanitaire. Le droit interne des Etats quant à lui, fait un recours systématique à son système classique pour la mise en oeuvre de ce droit. Cet attrait pour le système classique tranche pourtant avec les facteurs matériels du droit en cette matière où le contexte des crimes, l'ampleur des préjudices, la vastitude des victimes et les fluctuations de la qualité des auteurs l'ont presque plongé dans la désuétude. C'est ce qui a fait émerger la quête d'un paradigme d'efficacité dont l'expérience de la justice transitionnelle et de la justice réparatrice constituent « l'essai ». La discussion sur l'efficacité des résultats de cet essai conduit l'observateur averti à la conclusion qu'il y a encore du chemin. Pour la RDC, contre l'aporie du droit classique face aux souffrances des victimes des crimes internationaux, cette étude propose la construction d'une politique criminelle basée sur une approche holistique de la réparation. L'approche holistique impliquant, ici, une réaction globaliste face aux préjudices subis par les victimes des crimes internationaux. Préjudices multiformes pour lesquels les réponses en termes de réparation doivent relever d'une appréhension globale du droit, reposant sur l'interdisciplinarité et l'ouverture à la « technologie sociale ». / Faced with the irreparable prejudices arising from international crimes, except for the cases being prosecuted at the ICC and the processes of various Commissions and reparations funds of the UN, international law has been pontius-pilating when it comes implementing under domestic laws the rights of victims to reparations. This hypocrisy is particularly highlighted by the use of humanitarian aid. Domestic laws have systematically resorted to traditional practices to implement this right. This inclination towards traditional approaches is indeed at variance with the material elements of the law on reparations in as much as the context of the crimes, the scope of the damage, the vast number of victims and fluctuations in the types of perpetrators have simply made the traditional systems obsolete. Whence the quest for an efficiency paradigm hinged on «attempts» within transitional justice and reparations justice. Analyses of these attempts by experts reveal that a lot still has to be done. In the case of the DRC, and mindful of the shortcomings of the traditional legal system in mitigating the suffering of victims of international crimes, this study proposes a holistic approach to the development of a criminal reparations policy. This holistic approach requires a global response to the damage suffered by victims of international crimes. The reparations response to these multidimensional prejudices must reflect a global understanding of the law based on interdisciplinary and «social technology» considerations.

Procedural aspects of mediation in EC law Eva Rivera, 2011 1 Abstract The objective of this dissertation is the determination of the significance of procedural aspects of mediation and the answer to the question to what extent it has been considered within European Union law. The research is based on the assumption that the acknowledgment of a procedural relevance of mediation is crucial for its overall effectiveness. Mediation is besides its feature as a communication technique becoming ever more important as a dispute resolution procedure for civil and commercial conflicts in Europe. In this context the role of mediation within and in relation to other procedures for the resolution of disputes has to be considered. While on one hand the terminology and the differences between mediation and other forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as well as certain judicial attempts of settling disputes may not always be easily determined, on the other hand, it can be stated that the ADR form of mediation is beyond its early stages and clearly shows its own procedural relevance. The comparison of European national jurisdictions in the field of mediation leads to a core definition of mediation as a voluntary process where a third person without the authority to pass a binding decision over the dispute between...

L’influence du droit issu de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme sur le droit interne n’est plus à démontrer. Ce texte offre aux justiciables une protection accentuée de leurs droits fondamentaux. Cette affirmation ne doit pas être limitée aux droits que la Convention EDH contient expressément ou encore à ceux que la Cour de Strasbourg a elle-même dégagés grâce à son interprétation dynamique et évolutive. Entendues comme les moyens permettant de contester un acte juridictionnel, les voies de recours ne correspondent pas, en tant que telles, à un droit protégé par le système européen des droits de l’homme. Ce n’est pas pour autant qu’elles sont ignorées de ce dernier. Au contraire, elles bénéficient de toute l’attention des juges européens. Construite à partir des décisions et arrêts rendus par les organes de contrôle européens, la thèse met en évidence les relations entretenues entre la Convention EDH et les voies de recours. Il est alors indispensable d’identifier précisément le type de relations dont il s’agit. Si ces deux mécanismes ont en point commun l’idée de contrôle, les juges européens n’interviennent qu’à l’issue de la procédure interne à laquelle participent les voies de recours. Cette organisation permet de mettre pleinement en lumière le regard que la Cour de Strasbourg porte sur les voies de recours au moment de réaliser son propre contrôle. Il faut alors observer que son appréhension des voies de recours n’est pas univoque. La Cour ne fait pas que contrôler la mise en œuvre par les voies de recours des garanties procédurales contenues dans la Convention. Ces dernières sont également un moyen utilisé par la Cour européenne afin de s’assurer du respect de l’ensemble des droits conventionnels. La découverte de ces dimensions pose la question d’une qualification globale des relations entre la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme et les voies de recours. L’utilisation des voies de recours au cœur du contrôle de conventionnalité, en qualité d’instrument ou d’objet, montre que ces relations favorisent un renforcement mutuel des voies de recours comme du système de protection des droits conventionnels. / The influence of the law stemming from the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms no longer need to be demonstrated. This text provides people with an increased protection of their fundamental rights. This assertion can not be restricted to the rights that are clearly stated in the Convention or those that are drawn by the European Court of Human Rights thanks to its dynamic and evolutional interpretation. Remedies constitute a way to contest a judicial decision. On account of this definition, they do not correspond to a right directly protected by the European human rights system. That does not mean they are ignored by this system. On the contrary, European judges give their full attention to them. This thesis built up from the European decisions and judgments underscores the relations between the European Convention and remedies. It is therefore necessary to determine what kind of relations. If those two mechanisms have the idea of control in common, the European judges intervene only when the domestic proceedings in which remedies are brought is ended. This organization allows to highlight the way the European Court looks upon remedies when it carries out its own control. The way it grasps remedies is then not univocal. The European Court does not only control the enforcement of procedural guarantees of the Convention by remedies. These guarantees also are a means used by the European Court to ascertain the respect of all Convention rights. The discovery of these two aspects asks for a global qualification of the relations between the European Convention and remedies. Remedies’ use in the heart of the review of conventionality, as an instrument or an object, shows that these relations favour a mutual strengthening of remedies as well as the Convention rights system of protection.