The Court’s Correcting Mechanism: ‘General Measures’ as a Judicial Remedy to Address Legislative Inaction?

Abstract Citizens confronted with a domestic legislator remaining inactive in contravention of its human rights obligations may turn to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or Court). Having already passed legal challenges at the ‘heads’ end of the European system of human rights, the question arises whether they can find redress at the ‘tail’. When the ECtHR establishes a violation due to a lack of regulatory framework, it may decide to indicate general measures in Article 46 and pilot judgments. Based on an analysis of case law, this paper elaborates on how the Court goes about its remedial practice in legislative inactivity cases. The observations relate to addressing the domestic legislator directly, and the frequency, legal status, content, and deadline of the measures. They can, at least in part, be explained by the Court’s adherence to the principle of subsidiarity. Still, many uncertainties concerning the Court’s practice remain.