Human Rights Violations and Mutual Trust: Recent Case Law on the European Arrest Warrant

AbstractAccording to the agency paradigm enshrined by the 2001 ILC Articles on State Responsibility, private conducts are attributed to a state when they are carried out on the state's behalf or under its tight control. On closer look, this legal framework proves to be unable to deal with state involvement in human-rights violations perpetrated by powerful non-state actors, such as terrorist groups or transnational corporations. These wrongs, indeed, are often put in place with the fundamental contribution of – but not on behalf of (or under the control of) – a state, with the consequence that, under the traditional paradigm, they could not be attributed to the latter. Against this backdrop, the present paper argues that a new secondary norm has been developing that provides that private wrongs are to be imputed to a state if the latter knowingly facilitated (or otherwise co-operated in) their commission. Although international practice will be duly taken into account, the analysis will be focused mainly on US case law concerning corporate liability for international human-rights violations.

Download Full-text

Functions of compensation for human rights violation in international and national judicial decisions

Meždunarodnoe pravosudie ◽

10.21128/2226-2059-2021-1-81-101 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. 81-101

Author(s):

Dmitry Kuznetsov

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Effective Means ◽

National Court ◽

Case Law ◽

The State ◽

Customary Law ◽

Human Rights Violations ◽

Complex Nature ◽

European Court ◽

International Responsibility

When establishing human rights violations committed by the state, should it be violation of internationally protected rights or constitutional rights, the violator is obliged to compensate for the harm caused. In the meantime, neither international sources, nor national legal acts and case law answer the question whether the obligation to compensate is exhausted by the compensation awarded in accordance with a decision of an international judicial body or such a payment has punitive nature, and the state keeps the obligation to compensate the damage within the frameworks of national proceedings. Following the first part of opening remarks the second part of the article studies universal international law approach towards the state obligation to compensate for human rights violations, it reviews positions of the International Court of Justice, the model established in international customary law of international responsibility. The third part discusses the compensation mechanism of the European Court of Human Rights and a number of cases where the Russian Federation was the respondent state. The forth part considers national regulation of the Council of Europe states and case law thereof. The author argues that the established international case law in respect of awarding compensations for human rights violations is too restrictive – it does not take into account a complex nature of this phenomenon which includes both correction of the individual applicant situation (restitution of the pre-existed situation) and prevention of similar situations in the future. It is concluded that awarding the compensation by an international body primarily constitutes a measure of international responsibility whereas consideration by a national court is a more effective means of restitution of the applicants rights and that the national court shall not deny consideration of applicants claims due to the fact that they have already been awarded compensation by the international judicial body including the European Court of Human Rights.

Download Full-text

Physical Education and Religious Freedom

Advances in Business Information Systems and Analytics - Law, Ethics, and Integrity in the Sports Industry ◽

10.4018/978-1-5225-5387-8.ch007 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 144-155

Author(s):

Konstantinos Margaritis

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Physical Education ◽

Religious Freedom ◽

Case Law ◽

Democratic Society ◽

The Other ◽

Recent Case ◽

Freedom Of Religion ◽

Other Hand ◽

European Court

Freedom of religion has been constantly characterized as one of the foundations of a democratic society. On the other hand, the significance of physical education in the development of children's overall personality is beyond dispute. Thus, the question that arises is, What happens in a case of a conflict involving the above? The aim of this chapter is to provide an answer on the basis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. In particular, the fundamental cases of Dogru vs. France and Kervanci vs. France will be examined, as well as the recent case of Osmanoglu and Kocabas vs. Switzerland. Through the analysis of the cases, useful conclusions will be drawn on the possible impact of religious freedom on physical education.

Download Full-text

De lo subjetivo a lo objetivo en la jurisprudencia convencional, en dos ejemplos

Teoría y Realidad Constitucional ◽

10.5944/trc.42.2018.23648 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 513

Author(s):

Antonio López Castillo

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Public Space ◽

Case Law ◽

The Other ◽

Recent Case ◽

European Court ◽

Living Together

En la reciente jurisprudencia del TEDH se advierte una cierta modulación, de lo subjetivo a lo objetivo, en un contexto de controvertida reconsideración nacional de las sociedades abiertas de la Europa en crisis. De ello se trata aquí atendiendo a dos manifestaciones de conflictos de diverso porte y alcance; a propósito, la una, del inclusivo ámbito de la enseñanza, y relativa, la otra, a la regulación de acceso al espacio público mediante reglas excluyentes, de prevención general, pretendidamente instrumentales al aseguramiento de la salvaguarda de la convivencia, de la vida en común.The recent case law of the European Court of Human Rights shows a certain modulation, from the subjective to the objective, in a context of controversial national reconsideration of the open societies of Europe in crisis. This is what we are dealing with here in the light of two manifestations of conflicts of different sizes and scope; purposefully, one, of the inclusive field of education, and relative, the other, to the regulation of access to public space by means of excluding rules, of general prevention, supposedly instrumental to ensuring the safeguarding of coexistence, of living together.

Download Full-text

CHILD ABDUCTION: RECENT JURISPRUDENCE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

International and Comparative Law Quarterly ◽

10.1017/s0020589314000566 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 64 (1) ◽

pp. 39-63 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Paul Beaumont ◽

Katarina Trimmings ◽

Lara Walker ◽

Jayne Holliday

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Case Law ◽

Recent Case ◽

European Convention ◽

Habitual Residence ◽

Child Abduction ◽

European Court ◽

The Eu

AbstractThis article examines how the European Court of Human Rights has clarified its jurisprudence on how the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention Article 13 exceptions are to be applied in a manner that is consistent with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. It also analyses recent case law of the European Court of Human Rights on how the courts in the EU are to handle child abduction cases where the courts of the habitual residence have made use of their power under Article 11 of Brussels IIa.

Download Full-text