From the perspective of a defendant state, a declaratory judgment is the least intrusive remedy that a tribunal can afford the victim of a human rights violation. If the state concerned is committed to the rule of law, a declaratory judgment still should be effective to end the violation and prevent similar breaches in the future. In fact, for states committed to upholding a treaty and fulfilling in good faith their obligations, the adjudication itself may be of greatest significance. Generally, however, a declaratory judgment will not in and of itself be an adequate remedy. Nor should it be used to deter unsympathetic victims from seeking a remedy by denying them redress. It is the beginning, rather than the end, of remedies.
Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.