Abstract
There are significant overlaps between the jurisdiction of judicial and quasi-judicial bodies in a branch of international human rights law. Jurisdictional competition carries with it both negative and positive consequences.
The current stage of interaction between judicial and quasi-judicial bodies (e.g. relations between HRC and UN human rights bodies; both universal and more specialized committees – ICCPR and CEDR or CAT) supports attempts to regulate or even to eliminate jurisdictional competition. In contemporary international law the most suitable measures to regulate jurisdictional conflict of human rights treaty regimes are ″lis pendens, res judicata, and electa una via″ doctrines which are designed to prevent conflicting judgments and do not support strict anti-forum shopping norms