scholarly journals Regulatory framework of strike and its problem in Latvia

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. 01020
Author(s):  
Kitija Bite
Keyword(s):  
General Practitioners ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
Employment Relationship ◽  
Collective Agreement ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Employment Agreement ◽  
Labour Dispute ◽  
The Right

International legal provisions provide for human rights and freedoms, and the freedom of expression and the right to work belong to these. Considering that during any employment relationship disputes can arise between the involved parties, international legal provisions state that a strike as the final means for the settlement of a dispute can be used. Paragraph 108 of the Satversme (the Constitution of Latvia) provides that in Latvia, employed people have the right to strike. Systematically, the provisions of the Constitution are being regulated by the Labour Dispute Law and the Strike Law. It might seem that in Latvia, any employed person has been entitled to the right to strike as provided by the Satversme. However, the strike of general practitioners in summer 2017 highlighted the problem of executing strikes. Firstly, at the time being, the right to strike can only be associated with one form of employment, i.e., employment relationship. As only a part of general practitioners is employed on the basis of an employment agreement, the strike regulatory framework that is in force in Latvia can be used only by a part of general practitioners employed under an employment agreement in order to protect their collective interests. Secondly, the Labour Dispute Law provides for that a strike as the final means can be used exclusively for the protection of collective interests (within the framework of concluding a collective agreement), but not within the framework of a contract governed by public law. The strike by general practitioners showed that Latvia has complied only partially with international legal provisions because a strike can only be used by people employed under employment agreements and only in disagreements regarding a Collective agreement. In order to resolve this problem so that any employed person is entitled to the right to strike in the future, it is necessary to amend the Labour Dispute Law by expanding the range of labour dispute subjects. The aim: to analyse international and Latvia's regulatory framework for the right of employed people to strike and recommend necessary amendments to laws to solve detected problems. Materials used: international legal provisions and Latvian legal acts, publications and literature. Methods used in this article: descriptive, analysis, synthesis, dogmatic, induction and deduction as well as legal interpretation methods – grammatical, systemic, historical and teleological.

scholarly journals Konstitucionālās tiesības uz streiku: ģimenes ārstu streika gadījums

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (14) ◽  
pp. 35-46
Author(s):  
Kitija Bite
Keyword(s):  
General Practitioners ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Regulatory Framework ◽  
Employment Relationship ◽  
Collective Agreement ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Employment Agreement ◽  
Labour Dispute ◽  
The Right

Starptautiskajās tiesību normās ir iekļautas cilvēka brīvības un tiesības. Tās ietver vārda brīvību, tiesības uz darbu, tiesības apvienoties un tiesības uz streiku, ja darba tiesisko attiecību laikā pusēm rodas strīdi, u. c. tiesības. Latvijas Republikas Satversmes (turpmāk – Satversme) 108. pantā paredzētas strādājošo tiesības uz streiku kā galējo līdzekli darba strīdu risināšanai. Sistēmiski šī konstitūcijas norma tiek regulēta ar Darba strīdu likumu un Streiku likumu. Varētu šķist, ka Latvijā katram strādājošajam ir nodrošinātas tiesības streikot, kā tas paredzēts Satversmē. Tomēr ģimenes ārstu streiks 2017. gadā parādīja, ka streiku īstenošanā ir problēmas. 
Pirmkārt, tiesības streikot pašlaik ir attiecināmas tikai uz vienu nodarbinātības veidu – darba tiesiskajām attiecībām. Taču tikai daļai ģimenes ārstu nodarbinātības attiecības balstītas uz darba līguma pamata, tādējādi piemērot valstī spēkā esošo streiku regulējumu savu kolektīvo interešu aizsardzībai var tikai daļa ģimenes ārstu.
Otrkārt, Darba strīdu likums streiku kā galējo līdzekli ļauj piemērot tikai kolektīvo interešu aizsardzībai (koplīguma noslēgšanas ietvaros), bet ne publisko tiesību līguma ietvaros. 
Ģimenes ārstu streiks parādīja, ka Latvijā tikai daļēji izpildītas starptautiskās normas, jo tiesības streikot ir paredzētas, bet šī norma attiecināma tikai uz tām personām, kuras nodarbinātas uz darba līguma pamata un tikai koplīguma domstarpību gadījumos. Lai risinātu situāciju un turpmāk nodrošinātu katras nodarbinātās personas tiesības streikot, nepieciešams grozīt Darba strīdu likumu, paplašinot darba strīdu subjektu loku. International legal provisions provide for human rights and freedoms, and the freedom of expression and the right to work are part of these. Considering that during any employment relationship disputes can arise between the involved parties, international legal provisions for that provide strike as the final means to be utilised for the settlement of a dispute. Paragraph 108 of the Satversme (the Constitution of Latvia) provides that in Latvia, employed people have the right to strike. Systematically, the provisions of the Constitution are being regulated by the Labour Dispute Law and the Strike Law. It might seem that in Latvia, any employed person has been entitled to the right to strike as provided by the Satversme. However, the strike of general practitioners in summer 2017 highlighted a problem of executing strikes. Firstly, at the time being, the right to strike can be only associated with one form of employment, i.e., employment relationship. As only a part of general practitioners is employed on the basis of an employment agreement, the strike regulatory framework that is in force in Latvia can be used only by a part of general practitioners employed under an employment agreement in order to protect their collective interests. Secondly, the Labour Dispute Law provides for that a strike as the final means can be utilised exclusively for the protection of collective interests (within the framework of concluding a collective agreement), but not within the framework of a contract governed by the public law. The strike by general practitioners showed that Latvia has complied only partially with international legal provisions because a strike can only be utilised by people employed under employment agreements and only in disagreements regarding a collective agreement. In order to resolve this problem and so that any employed person is entitled to the right to strike in the future, it is necessary to amend the Labour Dispute Law by expanding the range of labour dispute subjects. 
The aim of the article is to analyse both international regulatory framework and that in Latvia for the right of employed people to strike and to recommend necessary amendments to laws to solve the detected problems.
Materials used for the compilation of the article: international legal provisions and Latvian legal acts, publications and literature. Methods used in this article: descriptive, analysis, synthesis, dogmatic, induction and deduction, graphic as well as legal interpretation methods – grammatical, systemic, historical and teleological.

Conditions of the Right to Erasure

2020 ◽  
pp. 196-274
Author(s):  
Jef Ausloos
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Historical Research ◽  
Legal Obligation ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Third ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Data Subject

This chapter zooms in on Article 17 GDPR, on the right to erasure (‘right to be forgotten’). It meticulously dissects the three paragraphs of this provision. The first paragraph lists six rights-to-erasure triggers which can be summarized as: (a) purpose expiration; (b) withdrawal of consent; (c) right to object; (d) unlawful processing; (e) legal obligation; and (f) withdrawal of consent by minors in the online environment. The second paragraph comprises an odd extension of the right to erasure, enabling data subjects to request that controllers who have made the personal data public, communicate potential erasure to anyone else processing that same personal data. The third paragraph lists five exemptions to the right to erasure, summarized as: (a) freedom of expression and information; (b) legal obligation or task carried out in the public interest or official authority; (c) public interest in the area of public health; (d) public interest archiving, scientific and historical research, or statistical purposes; and (e) legal claims. What becomes clear right away is how both the right-to-erasure’s triggers and exemptions all refer to other legal provisions in and outside the GDPR. As such, the right to erasure can be seen as a central hub in the GDPR, bringing together key data protection principles from the perspective of data subject empowerment.

scholarly journals Collective Rights of Persons Engaged in Gainful Employment Outside the Employment Relationship – en Outline of the Issue

2021 ◽  
Vol 95 ◽  
pp. 7-18
Author(s):  
Tomasz Duraj
Keyword(s):  
Trade Union ◽  
Employment Relationship ◽  
Equal Treatment ◽  
Collective Agreement ◽  
Employment Relations ◽  
Gainful Employment ◽  
Collective Rights ◽  
Adopted Model ◽  
Atypical Employment ◽  
The Right

The main objective of the following study is to introduce readers to the issue of the 2nd National Scientific Conference in the series “Atypical Employment Relations” organized on 3 October 2019 by the Centre for Atypical Employment Relations of the University of Lodz. The consequence of extending the right of coalition to persons performing paid work outside the employment relationship was that they were guaranteed important collective rights, which until 1 January 2019 were reserved primarily for employees. The rights which Polish legislator ensured to non-employees include the right to equal treatment in employment due to membership in a trade union or performing trade union functions; the right to bargain with a view to the conclusion of collective agreement and other collective agreements; the right to bargain to resolve collective disputes and the right to organize strikes and other forms of protest, as well as the right to protect union activists. The author positively assesses the extension of collective rights to people engaged in gainful employment outside the employment relationship, noting a number of flaws and shortcomings of the analyzed norms. The manner of regulating this matter, through the mechanism of referring to the relevant provisions regulating the situation of employees, the statutory equalization of the scope of collective rights of non-employees with the situation of employees, the lack of criteria differentiating these rights, as well as the adopted model of trade union representation based on company trade unions, not taking into account the specific situation of people working for profit outside the employment relationship, are the reasons why the amendment to the trade union law is seen critically and requires further changes.

When the State Speaks, What Should It Say?

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corey Brettschneider
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
The State ◽  
Hate Groups ◽  
New Approach ◽  
State Action ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
Theory Of Value ◽  
The Right ◽  
Equal Citizenship ◽  
The Ideal

How should a liberal democracy respond to hate groups and others that oppose the ideal of free and equal citizenship? The democratic state faces the hard choice of either protecting the rights of hate groups and allowing their views to spread, or banning their views and violating citizens' rights to freedoms of expression, association, and religion. Avoiding the familiar yet problematic responses to these issues, this book proposes a new approach called value democracy. The theory of value democracy argues that the state should protect the right to express illiberal beliefs, but the state should also engage in democratic persuasion when it speaks through its various expressive capacities: publicly criticizing, and giving reasons to reject, hate-based or other discriminatory viewpoints. Distinguishing between two kinds of state action—expressive and coercive—the book contends that public criticism of viewpoints advocating discrimination based on race, gender, or sexual orientation should be pursued through the state's expressive capacities as speaker, educator, and spender. When the state uses its expressive capacities to promote the values of free and equal citizenship, it engages in democratic persuasion. By using democratic persuasion, the state can both respect rights and counter hateful or discriminatory viewpoints. The book extends this analysis from freedom of expression to the freedoms of religion and association, and shows that value democracy can uphold the protection of these freedoms while promoting equality for all citizens.

Cancellation and Termination of Assignment Contract of Patrimonial Rights of the Author

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 197-201
Author(s):  
Tudor-Vlad Sfârlog
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Research ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Made In

Abstract The present study offers the doctrine of the right of intellectual creation new perspectives on the study of the institution of termination of the assignment contract for the patrimonial rights resulting from the intellectual creation. We believe that the present study is rich in doctrinal contributions, formulating new theses and opening the prospect for new perspectives of scientific research. Last but not least, we appreciate that the proposals made in the present study contribute not only to the activity of opinionated in the field, but also to the work of practitioners and direct beneficiaries of the legal provisions on the assignment of patrimonial rights of authors.

Preclusion of the Right to Submit New Facts and Evidence According to the Law on Contested Procedure in Kosovo

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 84
Author(s):  
ARTAN QERKINI
Keyword(s):  
Market Economy ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Practical Implementation ◽  
Relevant Evidence ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
The Law ◽  
Legislative Amendments ◽  
The Right

The market economy and changes within Republic of Kosovo’s legal system, which imposed the need of legal changes within the field of contested procedure also, have caused this procedure to become more efficient vis-à-vis legal provisions which were in force until October 6th 2008. Through the Law on Contested Procedure (hereinafter “LCP”), the legislator has aimed, inter alia, to make the contested procedure more concentrated, and thus, more efficient. In this regard, the Kosovar legislator has determined that it is mandatory for the parties to present any and all relevant evidence for resolving the dispute until the preparatory session, and in the event that one was not held, until the first main hearing session. As an exception, the parties may present relevant evidence even after this stage of proceedings, provided that their failure to present said evidence no later than at the preparatory session, respectively first main hearing session, was through no fault of their own. I consider that these legislative amendments are vital to ensuring practical implementation of the principle of efficience in the contested procedure.

LEGAL ISSUES REGARDING IMPOSITION OF E-FORM D AS A BASIS FOR DETERMINATION OF PREFERENTIAL TARIFFS IN ATIGA

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aditya Subur Purwana ◽  
Wahyu Hidayat ◽  
Mursal Maulana
Keyword(s):  
Research Method ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Layer System ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Directorate General ◽  
Domestic Law

Submission of Certificate of Origin (e-Form D) is conducted through a three-layer system named ASW Gateway, LNSW, and CEISA has raised issues related to the period/time of receipt of e-Form D given by customs authorities for the purposes of charging preferential tariffs in the ATIGA scheme. This article aims to analyze the legal certainty in submitting e-Form D to the customs authorities in the importing country, in this case, the Directorate General of Customs and Excise for the purpose of charging preferential tariffs, so that it can be in line with the presentation principle based on the ATIGA OCP and Indonesian domestic legal provisions. The research method used is a normative juridical approach with descriptive analysis and normative qualitative to draw conclusions. Based on the research, it was concluded that with regard to the submission of e-Form D, Customs and Excise Officials must have confidence based on factual evidence to determine whether the principle of submission of e-Form D has been accomplished or refused when an interruption in the ASW Gateway, LNSW or CEISA happened so the Customs Officer and Excise can determine tariffs based on OCP as well as domestic law in force in Indonesia.Keywords: ATIGA, Customs Authority, Directorate General of Customs and Excise, e-Form D, Tariffs Preference.ABSTRAK: Penyerahan SKA e-Form D dilakukan melalui tiga layer system yakni ASW Gateway, LNSW, dan CEISA memunculkan permasalahan terkait dengan jangka waktu/saat diterimanya e-Form D oleh otoritas kepabeanan untuk kepentingan pengenaan tarif preferensi dalam skema ATIGA. Penelitian bertujuan menganalisis kepastian hukum dalam penyerahan e-Form D ke otoritas kepabeanan di negara importir, dalam hal ini Direktorat Jenderal Bea dan Cukai untuk kepentingan pengenaan tarif preferensi, sehingga dapat sejalan dengan prinsip presentasi berdasarkan OCP ATIGA dan ketentuan hukum domestik Indonesia. Metode penelitian dilakukan dengan pendekatan yuridis normatif secara deskriptif analisis dan penarikan kesimpulan secara normatif kualitatif. Berdasarkan penelitian, disimpulkan bahwa berkenaan dengan penyerahan e-Form D, Pejabat Bea dan Cukai harus memiliki keyakinan berdasarkan bukti faktual untuk menentukan apakah prinsip penyerahan e-Form D sudah dipenuhi/tidak ketika terjadi gangguan pada ASW Gateway, LNSW atau CEISA sehingga Pejabat Bea dan Cukai dapat menentukan tarif berdasarkan OCP maupun hukum domestik yang berlaku di Indonesia. Kata Kunci: ATIGA, Direktorat Jenderal Bea dan Cukai, e-Form D, Otoritas Kepabeanan, Tarif Preferensi. 

Introductory Note

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Raimondi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
European Public ◽  
Introductory Note ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This article comments on four important judgments given by the European Court of Human Rights in 2016. Al-Dulimi v. Switzerland addresses the issue of how, in the context of sanctions regimes created by the UN Security Council, European states should reconcile their obligations under the UN Charter with their obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights to respect the fundamentals of European public order. Baka v. Hungary concerns the separation of powers and judicial independence, in particular the need for procedural safeguards to protect judges against unjustified removal from office and to protect their legitimate exercise of freedom of expression. Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary is a judgment on the interpretation of the Convention, featuring a review of the “living instrument” approach. Avotiņš v. Latvia addresses the principle of mutual trust within the EU legal order and the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the Convention.

Freedom of Expression versus Privacy and the Right to Reputation

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dirk Voorhoof
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Media Freedom ◽  
Investigative Journalism ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Right Of Privacy ◽  
The One ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

The normative perspective of this chapter is how to guarantee respect for the fundamental values of freedom of expression and journalistic reporting on matters of public interest in cases where a (public) person claims protection of his or her right to reputation. First it explains why there is an increasing number and expanding potential of conflicts between the right to freedom of expression and media freedom (Article 10 ECHR), on the one hand, and the right of privacy and the right to protection of reputation (Article 8 ECHR), on the other. In addressing and analysing the European Court’s balancing approach in this domain, the characteristics and the impact of the seminal 2012 Grand Chamber judgment in Axel Springer AG v. Germany (no. 1) are identified and explained. On the basis of the analysis of the Court’s subsequent jurisprudence in defamation cases it evaluates whether this case law preserves the public watchdog-function of media, investigative journalism and NGOs reporting on matters of public interest, but tarnishing the reputation of public figures.

Introduction

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan Hepburn
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Church Of England ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Roman Catholicism ◽  
Freedom Of Conscience ◽  
Oxford Movement ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Right ◽  
Race And Religion ◽  
The Church

In the 1940s and 1950s, Britain was relatively uniform in terms of race and religion. The majority of Britons adhered to the Church of England, although Anglo-Catholic leanings—the last gasp of the Oxford Movement—prompted some people to convert to Roman Catholicism. Although the secularization thesis has had a tenacious grip on twentieth-century literary studies, it does not account for the flare-up of interest in religion in mid-century Britain. The ecumenical movement, which began in the 1930s in Europe, went into suspension during the war, and returned with vigour after 1945, advocated international collaboration among Christian denominations and consequently overlapped with the promotion of human rights, especially the defence of freedom of worship, the right to privacy, freedom of conscience, and freedom of expression.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document