23. Freedom of Movement

Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Elizabeth Wicks ◽  
Andclare Ovey

This chapter examines the protection of the freedom of movement in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), explains the provisions of Protocols 4 and 7, and discusses the prohibition of expulsion of nationals and the right of entry to the territory of the State of nationality. It describes the complaints of violations of the freedom of movement provisions of Protocols 4 and 7, and analyses the Strasbourg Court’s interpretation of these provisions.

2020 ◽  
pp. 629-646
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Pamela McCormick ◽  
Clare Ovey

This chapter examines the protection of the freedom of movement in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), explains the provisions of Protocols 4 and 7, and discusses the prohibition of expulsion of nationals and the right of entry to the territory of the State of nationality. It describes the complaints of violations of the freedom of movement provisions of Protocols 4 and 7, and analyses the Strasbourg Court’s interpretation of these provisions, considering the reasons given for restrictions of movement. The chapter also considers the case-law on the collective expulsion of asylum seekers and migrants who have sought protection in Europe.


Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Elizabeth Wicks ◽  
Andclare Ovey

This chapter examines the protection of the right to free elections in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It discusses the provisions of Article 3 of Protocol 1 and highlights the increasing number of complaints of violations of this Article, which indicates that the Strasbourg Court is giving fresh emphasis to this provision as essential to the foundations of democratic legitimacy of the State. The chapter also discusses case-law on the nature of the legislature, electoral systems, the right to vote, and the right to stand for election.


2019 ◽  
Vol 68 ◽  
pp. 01021
Author(s):  
Olexandr Panasiuk ◽  
Larysa Grynko ◽  
Anna Prokhazka

Today's challenges dictate the need to strengthen the national and international legal mechanisms for the protection of personal data and the right to private communication. However, considered rights are not absolute. Legitimate restriction of guaranteed rights is possible, since these means of communication are a powerful tool in the investigation and disclosure of hard/very hard crimes, including transnational ones, especially considering the terrorist threats to Ukraine and other European countries. The possibility of restricting human rights, arising from the guarantees enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights and consistently enshrined in the ECHR, demands from the state the least compulsory guarantee while interfering with the rights of individuals – to act “in accordance with the law”. Law protection of personal data and right to privacy are researched in the context of peculiarities of conducting investigative (search), secret investigative (search) and other procedural actions in criminal proceedings, which concern access to some telecommunication means (e.g., smartphones). Taking into account different functional purposes of technical means of telecommunication, access and collecting of evidence contained therein, should be carried out on a case-to-case basis, in a different procedural form, considering specifics of telecommunication technologies in each particular case.


2010 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 266-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Leigh

This article analyses recent trends in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights concerned with the right to freedom of thought, belief and religion (Article 9, European Convention on Human Rights) and the right of parents to respect by the state for their religious and philosophical views in the education of their children (Article 2, Protocol 1).1 These developments include notable decisions concerned with protection from religious persecution in Georgia, with religious education in Norway and Turkey and with the display of crucifixes in state schools in Italy. It is apparent that the European Convention religious liberty jurisprudence increasingly stresses the role of the state as a neutral protector of religious freedom. For individuals religious freedom is now also recognised to include not only the right to manifest their religious belief but also freedom from having to declare their religious affiliation. As the religious liberty jurisprudence comes of age, other significant developments, for example in relation to conscientious objection to military service, can be anticipated.


2012 ◽  
pp. 101-125
Author(s):  
Maria Clara Maffei

The article analyzes some paradigmatic cases concerning the religious or cultural value of food which have been brought to the attention of the monitoring bodies instituted by the European Convention on Human Rights. Problems may arise in particular when individuals (e.g. prisoners, hospitalized people, military personnel, children at school) have to rely upon the State to provide sustenance. However, the Convention contains no reference to cultural or religious aspects of food nor to cultural rights in general. From this analysis it emerges that a right to "cultural" food could be framed in "wider" rights (e.g. freedom of thought, conscience and religion, right to respect for private and family life, protection of property, prohibition of torture) as it is an aspect of them. While it is clear that not all dietary choices deserve protection and abuses should be avoided, the different interests of the State should be balanced against the interests of individuals who need special food for religious, conscience or cultural reasons. The balance has to be fair and this includes the possibility for States to offer valid dietary alternatives, although in some cases, as for many other human rights, States will continue to be able to restrict the rights of individuals on different grounds.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-355
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi

The right to a fair trial is guaranteed under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In an effort to protect this right, the European Court of Human Rights has, inter alia, set criteria to determine whether or not the admission of a confession in domestic courts violated the right to a fair trial. This jurisprudence also shows that the Court has established two broad guidelines that govern the admissibility of confessions obtained through human rights violations. The first guideline is that confessions obtained in violation of absolute rights and in particular in violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights must be excluded, because their admission will always render the trial unfair. The second guideline is that a confession obtained in violation of a non-absolute right may be admitted without violating the right to a fair trial if the State had a compelling reason or reasons to restrict the right in question. The Court has also dealt with the issue of the admissibility of real evidence obtained through human rights violations. The purpose of this article is to highlight the Court’s jurisprudence.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-132
Author(s):  
Gabrijela Mihelčić ◽  
Maša Marochini Zrinski ◽  
Renata Šantek

The authors discuss and analyse case law of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the right to respect for home under Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and with respect the issue of proportionality. In the paper, the proportionality category was viewed as a criterion for securing protection and as a material precondition for deciding whether the State party's interference with the right to respect for home was proportionate. The cases in which the applicant's eviction occurred after national proceedings for the enforcement of mortgages were addressed. In this context, the genesis of the proportionality category was analysed, from the cases where the Court found it necessary to examine the proportionality to the cases where the Court did not consider the proportionality test necessary.


2020 ◽  
pp. 610-628
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Pamela McCormick ◽  
Clare Ovey

This chapter examines the protection of the right to free elections in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It discusses the provisions of Article 3 of Protocol 1 and highlights the increasing number of complaints of violations of this Article, which indicates that the Strasbourg Court is giving fresh emphasis to this provision as essential to the foundations of democratic legitimacy of the State. The chapter also discusses case-law on the nature of the legislature, the requirements of Article 3 in relation to the choice of electoral systems, the right to vote, and the right to stand for election.


Author(s):  
David Harris ◽  
Michael O’Boyle ◽  
Ed Bates ◽  
Carla Buckley

This chapter discusses Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the ‘right to liberty and security of person’. The notion of ‘liberty’ here covers the physical liberty of the person, which the Court views alongside Articles 2, 3, and 4 as ‘in the first rank of the fundamental rights that protect the physical security of an individual’. All kinds of detention by the state are controlled by Article 5, including detention in the criminal process, detention of the mentally disabled and detention prior to extradition or deportation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document