International Legal Rulings on Lustration Policies in Central and Eastern Europe: Rule of Law in Historical Context

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (03) ◽  
pp. 713-744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cynthia M. Horne
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Central And Eastern Europe ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
International Labour Organization ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
European Court

The transitional justice literature highlights various trade‐offs involved in the choice and implementation of lustration as a transitional justice measure in Central and Eastern Europe. This article examines how international legal body rulings on lustration laws have interpreted rule‐of‐law versus justice concerns. The European Court of Human Rights and the International Labour Organization have explored possible information problems, due process violations, employment discrimination issues, and bureaucratic loyalty concerns within the context of lustration. Three findings emerge from their legal rulings. First, contrary to popular notions, international legal bodies are not antilustration. The institutions are engaging with questions regarding the fair implementation, not the legality, of lustration laws. Second, the prioritizing of justice concerns during the transition efforts is highlighted as a way to lay a strong democratic foundation. Third, the organizations have emphasized the importance of placing rule of law in historical context, thereby situating post‐Communist societies within other posttotalitarian regime‐building narratives.

Expanding Competences by Judicial Lawmaking: The Pilot Judgment Procedure of the European Court of Human Rights

2011 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 1231-1260 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Fyrnys
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Central And Eastern Europe ◽  
Institutional Design ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Current Debate ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Lawmaking

The institutional design of the Strasbourg system that has evolved over the last decades is an expression of contemporary debates surrounding the system's very nature and purpose. The current debate primarily bears on the range of choices that the Council of Europe faces in adapting to the changes in Europe, which largely have been caused by its expansion to cover nearly all post-Communist States of Central and Eastern Europe since the 1990s. This expansion, and with it the extension of the scope of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) to now more than 800 million people in forty seven countries, has confronted the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) with a far broader range of human rights problems than had previously existed. By 2010, the number of pending cases had risen to 139,650 but the Court's adjudicative capacity remains limited.

Part IV The Right to Reparation/Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, B Guarantees of Non-Recurrence of Violations, Principle 36 Reform of State Institutions

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mayer-Rieckh Alexander ◽  
Duthie Roger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Institutional Reform ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
State Institutions ◽  
The Right

Principle 36 deals with institutional reform in the aftermath of human rights violations. It contains measures that focus on state institutions responsible for violations and seek to identify the causes of the violations. The measures aim to reform structures and systems that allowed, facilitated, or promoted violations, and have the potential to act as an enabling condition for other transitional justice mechanisms by weakening or removing institutional sources of opposition. This chapter first provides a contextual and historical background on Principle 36 before discussing its theoretical framework and practice. It also examines the shift in emphasis from purges, to vetting, to broader institutional reform; the influence of historical context in Latin America and Eastern Europe in particular on the articulation of the measures; and the emphasis on the preventive function of the measures.

D.H. and Others v. Czech Republic: a major set-back for the development of non-discrimination norms in Europe

2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 421-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morag Goodwin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Czech Republic ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Racial Discrimination ◽  
Central And Eastern Europe ◽  
Racial Segregation ◽  
Special Schools ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
European Court ◽  
Centre Piece

On 7 February 2006, a chamber of the European Court of Human Rights gave judgment in the much awaited ‘Ostrava case’, which challenged the placing of disproportionate numbers of Romani children in ‘special schools’ for the learning impaired in the Czech Republic. This practice, widespread across Central and Eastern Europe, amounts in effect to racial segregation and denies Romani children access to a standard of education comparable to their non-Romani peers. The Ostrava case, taking eight months to assemble and seven years to reach judgment day in Strasbourg, represented the centre-piece of the litigation strategy of the Romani rights movement. The decision of the Strasbourg Court to ignore the evidence of indirect racial discrimination by a 6-1 majority represents not only a setback for those working for the improvement of the situation of the Roma – widely acknowledged as the most disadvantaged, discriminated and marginalised group in Europe – but also for the crystallisation of non-discrimination norms in Europe.

scholarly journals The European Court of Human Rights on Nazi and Soviet Past in Central and Eastern Europe

2016 ◽  
Vol 45 ◽  
pp. 117-129
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Gliszczyńska–Grabias ◽  
◽  
Grażyna Baranowska ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Central And Eastern Europe ◽  
European Court

NGOs before the European Commission and the Court of Human Rights

1996 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 289-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marek Antoni Nowicki
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Central And Eastern Europe ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Human

Non-governmental organisations play an important part and are indispensable for the effective functioning of the international human rights protection machinery. This article is an overview of the role of NGOs in the procedure under the European Convention on Human Rights. They appear before the Convention institutions in various different capacities. Some of them claim to be victims of human rights violations. Many NGOs, especially human rights organisations, strive to provide assistance to individual applicants. Ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights by countries of Central and Eastern Europe is a great challenge for non-governmental organisations from this region. At the time they play a quite important role in disseminating knowledge on the Convention to the general public. Protocol No. 11 creating soon a new single European Court of Human Rights will open new perspectives also for NGOs.

Os crimes contra os direitos humanos praticados na ditadura militar brasileira: Justiça de transição e persecução penal

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos José Pinto
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Transitional Justice ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Military Dictatorship ◽  
Criminal Offenders ◽  
State Agents ◽  
Democratic Rule

This book aims to analyze the crimes against human rights that offended the Democratic Rule of Law in Brazil, committed by state agents in the Brazilian military dictatorship (1964/1985), asserting that they remained unpunished. In view of this, to address this issue, it is proposed that criminal offenders be held liable. The issue of our slow Transitional Justice will also be examined, arguing for the criminal prosecution of state agents who violated human rights in Brazil, demonstrating how and how this can occur, all in order to move away from impunity, hitherto guaranteed by the Brazilian Amnesty Law, ensuring the effectiveness of justice and the strengthening of democracy.

Standardy należytego uzasadnienia w świetle orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka

2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Reasoning ◽  
The Right

The core function of the judiciary is the administration of justice through delivering judgments and other decisions. The crucial role for its acceptance and legitimization by not only lawyers, but also individulas (parties) and the hole society plays judicial reasoning. It should reflect on judge’s independence within the exercise of his office and show also judicial self-restraint or activism. The axiology and the standards of proper judicial reasoning are anchored both in constitutional and supranational law and case-law. Polish Constitutional Tribunal derives a duty to give reasoning from the right to a fair trial – right to be heard and bring own submissions before the court (Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution), the right to appeal against judgments and decisions made at first stage (Article 78), the rule of two stages of the court proceedings (Article 176) and rule of law clause (Article 2), that comprises inter alia right to due process of law and the rule of legitimate expactation / the protection of trust (Vertrauensschutz). European Court of Human Rights derives this duty to give reasons from the guarantees of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of European Convention of Human Rights. In its case-law the ECtHR, taking into account the margin of appreciation concept, formulated a number of positive and negative requirements, that should be met in case of proper reasoning. The obligation for courts to give sufficient reasons for their decisions is also anchored in European Union law. European Court of Justice derives this duty from the right to fair trial enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Standards of the courts reasoning developed by Polish constitutional court an the European courts (ECJ and ECtHR) are in fact convergent and coherent. National judges should take them into consideration in every case, to legitimize its outcome and enhance justice delivery.

In Search of a Standard: References to the Rule of Law in the Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights

ICL Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-69
Author(s):  
Eszter Polgári
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Working Definition ◽  
European Court ◽  
Structured Analysis ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Grand Chamber

AbstractThe present article maps the explicit references to the rule of law in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR by examining the judgments of the Grand Chamber and the Plenary Court. On the basis of the structured analysis it seeks to identify the constitutive elements of the Court’s rule of law concept and contrast it with the author’s working definition and the position of other Council of Europe organs. The review of the case-law indicates that the Court primarily associates the rule of law with access to court, judicial safeguards, legality and democracy, and it follows a moderately thick definition of the concept including formal, procedural and some substantive elements. The rule of law references are predominantly ancillary arguments giving weight to other Convention-based considerations and it is not applied as a self-standing standard.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document