Based on the proposal by the European Council, more than 25 heads of state and the World Health Organization (WHO) support development of an international treaty on pandemics, that planned to be negotiated under the auspices of WHO, will be presented to the World Health Assembly in May 2021. Given that the treaty alone is not enough to ensure compliance, triggers for a high-level political response is required. To this end, to inform the design of a support system, we explored institutional mechanismsi with a mandate to review compliance with key international agreements in their signatory countries and conduct independent country investigations in a manner that manages sovereign considerations. Based on our review, there is no single global mechanism that could serve as a model in its own right. There is, however, potential to combine aspects of existing mechanisms to support a strong, enforceable treaty. These aspects include: • Periodic review - based on the model of human rights treaties, with independent experts as the authorized monitoring body to ensure the independence. If made obligatory, the review could support compliance with the treaty. • On-site investigations - based on the model by the Committee on Prevention of Torture according to which visits cannot be blocked by state parties. • Non-negotiable design principles - including accountability; independence; transparency and data sharing; speed; emphasis on capabilities; and incentives. • Technical support - WHO can provide countries with technical assistance, tools, monitoring, and assessment to enhance emergency preparedness and response.

Situations of gross violation of human rights require a larger response than is possible through the invocation of complaints mechanisms in international human rights treaties. Nevertheless such international legal procedures can have an influence through the impartial establishment of disputed facts and international accountability. The European Convention on Human Rights has been invoked against Turkey by a large number of citizens of Kurdish origin claiming to be victims of practices of violation by the security forces in the emergency region of the South East. The experience of these cases before the Commission and Court to date demonstrates the hurdles that an individual complainant faces in seeking to prove alleged patterns of gross violation. These cases which have involved a major role for the Commission in fact-finding have also produced a new emphasis on the importance of the right to a domestic remedy as part of a State's commitments under the Convention. Alter the coming into force of Protocol 11 the new Court may well be faced with new situations of violent conflict or of minority tensions which may necessitate radical changes to its powers, procedures and practice.

The ever-increasing membership of the Council of Europe, and the accompanying growth in the number of States party to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), promises to create fresh challenges for the new single European Court of Human Rights which will begin to sit full-time in Strasbourg as of 1 November 1998. Speculation varies with regard to the type of challenges that the new Court will have to face, but one which cannot be ignored is the likelihood that the new Court will have to come to terms with more cases arising from situations of conflict. Judge Jambrek, urging judicial restraint and conservatism in a dissenting opinion, warned that the Court may have to look at what happened in the Croat Region of Kraijna, in the Republika Srpska, in other parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina or in Chechnya. If the Court is so required, many cases may involve issues which call for consideration of international humanitarian law.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created enormous challenges for national economies, livelihoods, and public services, including health systems. In January 2021, the World Health Organization proposed an international treaty on pandemics to strengthen the political commitment towards global pandemic preparedness, control, and response. The plan is to present a draft treaty to the World Health Assembly in May 2021. To inform the design of a support system for this treaty, we explored existing mechanisms for periodic reviews conducted either by peers or an external group as well as mechanisms for in-country investigations, conducted with or without country consent. Based on our review, we summarized key design principles requisite for review and investigation mechanisms and explain how these could be applied to pandemics preparedness, control, and response in global health. While there is no single global mechanism that could serve as a model in its own right, there is potential to combine aspects of existing mechanisms. A Universal Periodic Review design based on the model of human rights treaties with independent experts as the authorized monitoring body, if made obligatory, could support compliance with a new pandemic treaty. In terms of on-site investigations, the model by the Committee on Prevention of Torture could lend itself to treaty monitoring and outbreak investigations on short notice or unannounced. These mechanisms need to be put in place in accordance with several core interlinked design principles: compliance; accountability; independence; transparency and data sharing; speed; emphasis on capabilities; and incentives. The World Health Organization can incentivize and complement these efforts. It has an essential role in providing countries with technical support and tools to strengthen emergency preparedness and response capacities, including technical support for creating surveillance structures, integrating non-traditional data sources, creating data governance and data sharing standards, and conducting regular monitoring and assessment of preparedness and response capacities.

L'adhésion toujours croissante de nouveaux membres au Conseil de l'Europe, ainsi que l'augmentation simultanée du nombre d'États parties à la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme, promet de poser des défis inédits à la nouvelle Cour européenne des droits de l'homme — institution unique qui siégera en permanence à Strasbourg à compter du 1er novembre 1998. Diverses théories existent quant au type de défis que cette nouvelle Cour devra relever. Il en est une toutefois dont on ne peut pas faire abstraction et selon laquelle la Cour devra probablement traiter un plus grand nombre d'affaires résultant de situations de conflit. Le juge Jambrek, en préconisant la retenue et le conservatisme judiciaires dans une opinion dissidente qu'il a émise, a attiré l'attention sur le fait que la Cour pourrait avoir à se pencher sur les événements qui se sont déroulés dans la région croate de la Kraijna, en République Srpska, ainsi que dans d'autres parties de la Bosnie-Herzégovine ou en Tchétchénie.