{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022031823745410038, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.104477611940299, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Russia v ECtHR - Resistance or Dialogue: A Comparative Analysis

This article pursues a comprehensive and critical analysis of Anchugov and Gladkov v Russia – a recent Russian Constitutional Court (RCC) decision in which Russia has declared a European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) judgment impossible to implement for the first time. I intend to move beyond the usual narratives of Russia showing disregard for international human rights institutions and focus, instead, on the RCC’s decision as a form of constitutional brake. Compared to similar legal devices deployed in Germany and the United Kingdom (UK), the RCC’s response seems less measured and thus less legitimate. Despite this it will be shown that the RCC was facing a unique constitutional conundrum in which such a radical response was understandable.