Religious Liberty Under the European Convention on Human Rights

2008 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-219
Author(s):  
Michał Rynkowski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Church And State ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Capital City ◽  
European Convention ◽  
National Courts ◽  
State Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Republic Of Cyprus

The eighteenth annual meeting of the European Consortium for Church and State Research took place in Nicosia, Cyprus, in November 2007, the only divided capital city in the world. It was devoted to the question of how national courts respect and apply the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), particularly Article 9, in their jurisprudence. The conference gathered representatives of 26 European Union States (all except Malta) and was hosted by Mr Achilles Emilianides of the Cyprus Institute for Church and State Research. The conference was inaugurated in a ceremonial way, by the President of the Republic of Cyprus, the President of the Supreme Court, the Attorney General and the President of the European Consortium, Professor S. Berlingó from Messina.

scholarly journals Pierādījumu pārbaude kriminālprocesā

2021 ◽  
pp. 550-559
Author(s):  
Oskars Kulmanis ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Court Hearing

The article addresses specific aspects of the principle of equality of arms, which is one of the fundamental principles that secures the rights of an accused person in court proceedings in criminal cases. It outlines one particular aspect laid down in Article 6 § 3 (d) of the European Convention of Human Rights, that is, the right of an accused person to examine witnesses against him. Another important aspect which concerns the rights of an accused person to examine the witnesses against him is an obligation for the national courts to justify convictions with the evidence verified in a court hearing. The Supreme Court of the Republic of Latvia and the European Court of Human Rights have emphasized several important practices of principle of fair trial which determine the justification of convictions with the evidence that has not been verified in court proceedings in criminal cases.

scholarly journals (Just) Give Me A Reason …

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 ◽  
pp. 12-35
Author(s):  
Julia Laffranque
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Summary Judgment

Judicial systems often wrestle with whether to sacrifice always presenting thorough judicial reasoning for the sake of an effective leave-to-appeal system. The paper outlines issues of reference to the Luxembourg Court, particularly with regard to Estonian circumstances in light of the ECtHR judgment in Baydar v. the Netherlands. The interplay between EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights in this regard is considered first, along with the importance of giving reasons, courts’ authority, the different roles of domestic and European courts, the duty of referring questions to the CJEU and exemption, consequences of non-referral in EU law, the Strasbourg Court’s role in dialogue between national courts and the CJEU, etc. Examined next are such matters as influences on preliminary references in European Union law, summary reasoning and limits to the reasoning duty (especially with regard to the Ullens de Schooten case of the ECtHR), associated division of competencies between the Strasbourg and Luxembourg courts, and finally the reasoning of the ECtHR itself as good or bad example. The author then considers the Supreme Court of Estonia’s leave-to-appeal system and the national courts’ practice in relation to Baydar, concluding that, while reasoned judgments are important and a right, no right exists for the applicant’s case to be referred by a domestic judge to the Luxembourg Court, though it is vital that summary judgment not be arbitrary / manifestly unreasonable; that Estonian courts have made reasonable use of the preliminary reference procedure before the Luxembourg Court thus far; and that they should articulate well the reasoning for referral/non-referral for litigants. The author proposes that the Estonian Supreme Court explain, exceptionally in one refusal of leave to appeal (cf. the Netherlands), that the general requirements for granting leave to appeal cover also the situation of preliminary questions to the CJEU and C.I.L.F.I.T. arguments of the CJEU. Above all, neither the interplay between EU law and the European Convention on Human Rights nor the role of national courts finding their way in complex legal surroundings should be neglected. 

scholarly journals Re-Evaluasi Proses Penyelesaian Pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-69
Author(s):  
Muhammad Arief
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
The Political ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
University Campus ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Security Forces ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Republic

Tujuan Penelitian menganalisis proses penyelesaian pelanggaran Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM) berat pada Persitiwa Trisaksi oelh Kejaksanaan Agung Republik Indonesia. Metode Penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian hukum. Normative dengan pendekatan kualitatif yang diuraikan secara deskriptif. Hasil peneltian menunjukan bahwa pelanggaran HAM berat pada peristiwa penanganan demonstrasi di Kampus Universitas Trisakti pada tahun 1998, oleh aparat keamanan; sehingga menyebabkan tewasnya empat orang mahasiswa dan ratusan lainnya luka. Komnas HAM telah melakukan (investigasi) penyelidikan terhadap peristiwa tersebut, dan laporan Komnas HAM menyimpulkan telah terjadi pelanggaran HAM berat atas insiden tersebut. Hasil penyelidikan tersebut telah dilaporankn Komnas HAM, dan berkas laporan tersebut telah diserahkan kepada Jaksa Agung; tetapi sampai saat ini (±18 tahun) Jaksa Agung belum memproses ke tingkat peneyidikan dan penuntutan. Alasan Jaksa Agung, berkaitan dengan hal-hal teknis yuridis, yang oleh publik dianggap tidak relevan dengan substansi kasus/masalah. Tetapi intinya aspek politis dan non yudisial lebih mengitari kasus-kasus tersebut. The purpose of this research is to analyze the process of resolving gross violations of human rights (HAM) at the Trisaksi event by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The research method used is legal research methods. Normative with a qualitative approach described descriptively. The research results show that gross human rights violations during the handling of demonstrations at the Trisakti University Campus in 1998, by security forces; causing the death of four students and hundreds of others injured. Komnas HAM has conducted (investigated) investigations into the incident, and the Komnas HAM report concludes that gross human rights violations have occurred in the incident. The results of the investigation have been reported by Komnas HAM, and the report files have been submitted to the Attorney General; but until now (± 18 years) the Attorney General has not yet proceeded to the level of investigation and prosecution. The Attorney General's reasons relate to juridical technical matters which the public deems irrelevant to the substance of the case / problem. But in essence, the political and non-judicial aspects surround these cases.

scholarly journals Hate Crimes: Evaluation of Lithuanian Courts’ Decisions in the Light of the Practice of the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-47
Author(s):  
Mindaugas Bilius ◽  
Žaneta Navickienė ◽  
Vilius Velička
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Crime ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Special Knowledge ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Definition Of

Abstract In this article, the authors analyse the practice of the Lithuanian national courts and the European Court of Human Rights in hate crime cases, provide insights into the synergy between the decisions made by these courts, and suggest further improvement actions. This research shows that proving the circumstances surrounding various forms of hatred is quite complex, often lacking a more comprehensive, in-depth definition of the totality of circumstances by taking account of the need for special knowledge, the identification of guilt, and the system and intensity of actions. There is often a divide between criminal liability and the possibility of other countermeasures, especially when examining cases related to hate speech. Court decisions draw attention to the fact that it is necessary to consider the totality of the data collected, not individual data or individual fragments of circumstances. Among other things, the decisions emphasize the ultima ratio principle: whether criminal liability is an adequate measure in cases of hate speech. The topical issues examined in the article draw attention to the collection of significant data and the organization of investigations of these crimes, issues relating to proof and the emerging practice of the European Court of Human Rights and the Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania in this category of cases, highlighting the two main problematic aspects: first, the determination of the totality of objective and subjective features and second, the fact of identifying a real threat.

Freedom of expression and respect for private life in the context of the development of new information technologies: judicial practice of the ECHR and national courts

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 141-156
Author(s):  
Iliya Shablinsky
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Partial Control ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
New Information

This article examines and summarises judicial practice in cases related to the use of new information technologies. The study primarily focuses upon the decisions of Russian courts (general jurisdiction and arbitration) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Employing ECHR practice, the author also refers to numerous decisions by courts in Hungary and the United Kingdom. Cases related to the use of new information technologies can be distinguished between, and this article examines the judicial practice of three categories of cases: 1) blocking of internet resources; 2) employers’ control over employees’ electronic correspondence; 3) journalists’ use of hyperlinks in author’s texts and their responsibility of such placements. Within each category of cases, the rights of citizens can be seriously violated. The article highlights that in an era of rapid development of new information technologies, states, represented by special services and authorised state bodies, are making unprecedented efforts to ensure that they maintain at least partial control over the activities of new actors (bloggers, Internet media, Internet platforms, etc.). Similarly, courts often compromise with authorities when resolving such issues. Notably, national Russian courts did not consider parties’ interests, nor did they assess the need to block all sites with a particular IP address. They did not even follow the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation’s decision to apply the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights within the framework of the ECHR. The courts limited themselves to pointing out that Roskomnadzor acted within its power. Thus, the decisions of the national courts did not offer a mechanism for protecting rights. Within the norms regulating the new sphere of relations, there are often norms of a restrictive and prohibitive nature, and these norms are dominant in the Russian Federation. In this regard, there remains grounds for concern among lawyers involved in the protection of rights related to new information technologies.

scholarly journals The normative framework of the protection of personal data in the field of (bio)medicine

Temida ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 99-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasa Rajic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Treatment Procedures ◽  
Biomedical Treatment

This paper discusses the normative framework of regulating the right to protection of personal data relating to biomedical treatment procedures of patients as human rights. The subjects of analysis are the European Convention, the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine and the relevant provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. The right to protection of personal data in the field of biomedicine is analyzed comparatively in terms of the content of this right and in terms of basis for limiting this right. The analysis is carried out to find answers to the question if the constitutional framework is consistent in terms of exercising this right, taking into account the constitutional provision on the direct application of human rights guaranteed by international treaties and other provisions that determine the status of international sources of law in our legal system.

European Court of Human Rights and the Bulgarian Judicial System

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (6) ◽  
pp. 535-544
Author(s):  
Aleksandur Kirkov ◽  
◽  
Ana Andonova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Essential Feature ◽  
Methodological Approach ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
European Convention ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court

Bulgaria ratified the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in 1992, as such this European act has become part of our domestic legislation. Explaining in detail the differences and similarities between the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg and the Bulgarian judicial system, we will actually see how much they are similar. This is the purpose of the present study - comparative analysis in all aspects: territorial jurisdiction, legal jurisdiction, including procedurally legitimate persons to file complaints, procedural issues, stages of the process, court decisions and appeals. The first and most important task of the study is to get acquainted in detail with our European rights, as well as their judicial protection. On the other hand, the knowledge of the European judicial mechanisms leads to the expansion of our national horizons in a supranational perspective, to opportunities for professional realization outside the borders of the country, on a European and global scale. The research method used in the present scientific work is the comparative analysis. The methodology we refer to in preparing the analysis is based on a predetermined methodological approach and structure in conducting the analysis. The methodological approach itself includes a general overview of the legal framework, regulating the administration of justice in national courts and at European level. An essential feature of the approach used is to compare the two established legal systems, at home and in Strasbourg, at all levels, to explore links and interdependencies possible differences. Expected results: acquainting the Bulgarians with their European rights, as in case of violation of these rights, learning about the mechanisms for their protection in court. Conclusions and summaries: Bulgaria is part of the common European framework. As such, its citizens are Bulgarians, but also Europeans. Namely, as Europeans, they have rights that are guaranteed to them by Europe and that should be respected in Bulgaria. Failure to respect these European rights creates conflicts that should be resolved by both national courts and the European Court of Human Rights.

When Are National Courts Obliged to Refer Questions?

2021 ◽  
pp. 201-248
Author(s):  
Morten Broberg ◽  
Niels Fenger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Preliminary Ruling ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Case File ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Legal Consequences

Chapter 6 defines when a national court must make a preliminary reference. In principle, a national court whose decision cannot be appealed against (a court of last instance) is obligated to make a reference for a preliminary ruling if the main proceedings give rise to a question about the interpretation or validity of EU law. The chapter analyses when a national court is regarded as being a court of last instance and it analyses when a court of last instance is exempt from the obligation to make a reference. Particular focus is upon the acte éclairé and acte clair doctrines. Chapter 6 also examines when national courts, other than those of last instance, have a duty to make a reference. The chapter also considers the legal consequences of a national court failing to comply with its obligation to make a reference; in this respect it considers the question of how a failure to make a preliminary reference may affect the validity of a national judgment, the duty to reopen the case file, the obligation to pay damages, the possibility that the Commission will initiate infringement proceedings, and the possibility that such failure will constitute an infringement of the European Convention on Human Rights.

14. Land Law and Human Rights

Land Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 593-629
Author(s):  
Chris Bevan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Land Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the relationship between land law and human rights. From a distinctly land law perspective, the human rights discourse has given rise to much debate, which continues to fuel much academic commentary including recent examination of the availability of horizontal effect in McDonald v McDonald in the Supreme Court and in the European Court of Human Rights. The chapter focuses chiefly on the two most pertinent provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) for land law; namely Art. 1 of the First Protocol and Art. 8 and reflects on the, at times, difficult relationship between land law and human rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document