The “Bolotnoe Affair” and the Implementation of the Right to Freedom of Assembly in the Russian Federation

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 396-426
Author(s):  
Mariya Riekkinen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Court Cases ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Parliamentary Elections ◽  
European Court ◽  
Moscow City ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

A series of protests across Russia, triggered by procedural violations during the 2011 parliamentary elections and results of the 2012 presidential elections, culminated on 6 May 2012 with a demonstration at Bolotnaia Square in Moscow. That demonstration led to violent clashes between protesters and the police. The dispersal of this demonstration and the subsequent criminal and administrative trials conducted against some of the protesters, as well as the controversy regarding the severity of some of the penalties imposed by the courts, became known as the Bolotnoe Affair. The Bolotnoe Affair is analyzed from the perspective of implementing the right to freedom of assembly in Russia. The main goal is to conduct a contextual legal analysis clarifying whether the right to freedom of assembly is adequately implemented in the legal order of the Russian Federation, in order to illustrate whether the protesters in the Bolotnoe Affair were able to express their opinions with regard to the procedure and results of the elections. The leading court cases relevant to the participatory rights of the protesters as exemplified by the appellate decisions of the Moscow City Court will also be examined. In particular, twelve decisions of the Moscow City Court during the period 2012–2014 (full texts of which are reproduced in publicly available legal databases) are reviewed, as well as two recent judgments in European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) cases closely related to these earlier cases. Analyzing the Moscow City Court decisions vis-à-vis the judgments of the ECtHR, the author concludes that the Moscow City Court’s rulings did not conform with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (echr) regarding the right to freedom of assembly and the right to liberty.

scholarly journals Enforceability of ECtHR Judgements in Russia: Alternatives of Interaction Between Jurisdictions

2018 ◽  
Vol 50 ◽  
pp. 01192
Author(s):  
Ivan Usenkov ◽  
Igor Morozov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Constitutional Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Russian Federation

Issues of enforceability of the European Court of Human Rights judgements in Russia are considered in the article. The authors infer the priority of the model, in which judgements can be unimplemented if they are contrary to the constitutional law of the country in accordance with comparative legal analysis. However, the state is ought to make everything possible in order to enforce the decision, even interpret the Constitution, if possible. The authors conclude that issues of correlation of sovereignty and regional consensus, subsidiarity principles and supranationality, interpretation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and fundamental freedoms have not obtained a response. The European Court of Human Rights should be more thorough with the aspects of the national legal systems, but rejection of the execution of its judgements is unacceptable. Relevant provisions are to be excluded from the FCL from 21.07.1994 N 1-FCL «The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation».

scholarly journals The System of Procedural Principles of Proceedings in Administrative Offenses Cases

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 153-159
Author(s):  
A. R. Nobel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Decisions

The paper provides definitions of the principles and system of principles of proceedings in cases of administrative offenses. Based on the norms of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation and the practice of their application, the author substantiates the position that the principles of proceedings in cases of administrative offenses are, to varying degrees, enshrined in regulatory legal acts constituting legislation on administrative offenses, both directly and indirectly. The system of procedural principles of proceedings in cases of administrative offenses is revealed. The author includes the following principles in this system: open consideration; state language; direct examination of evidence; freedom to evaluate evidence; compulsory consideration of applications; freedom to appeal against procedural decisions; competition and equality of the parties; fair consideration of the case; ensuring the right to defense. The content of these principles having a pronounced procedural nature is formed through a systemic interpretation of the provisions of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the European Convention on Human Rights, the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the case law of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights. The author concludes that, despite the existence of various ways of consolidating the procedural principles of proceedings in cases of administrative offenses, the greatest efficiency of their perception and application will be achieved only when the principles are reflected in a special chapter of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

scholarly journals REASONABLE TIME OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: CRIMINALISTIC CHARACTER

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 101-111
Author(s):  
K. A. Korsakov ◽  
V. V. Konin ◽  
E. V. Sidorenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Reasonable Time ◽  
European Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right

In the Russian legal system, the understanding that justice should be not only timely, but also fast enough has matured for a long time. The delay in the investigation of a criminal case and its consideration by the court allows the guilty to avoid the deserved punishment in some cases, which calls into question the principle of inevitability of punishment on the one hand, and hinders the right to access justice, on the other hand. The term reasonable time for legal proceedings has emerged as a requirement of international law to be tried without undue delay. The right to a reasonable period of criminal proceedings is regulated by Article 6.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, but this norm is not fully implemented to date, as evidenced by the decisions of the European court of human rights issued on complaints of violation by the Russian Federation of the provisions of the European Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms. At the same time, the available research considers the requirement of reasonable terms in criminal proceedings from the standpoint of criminal procedure law, which is not fully justified. The article attempts to consider the problematic issues of reasonable terms of criminal proceedings from the perspective of criminology, as a science that has incorporated theoretical and practical issues of fighting crime, as well as the problems of criminalistic criteria in criminal proceedings.

7 International Treaties in Russian Judicial and Arbitral Practice

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Butler William E
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
The Russian Federation

This chapter explores the role of Soviet and post-Soviet Russian courts in interpreting and applying international treaties. It is clear that Soviet courts dealt more frequently with treaties than the scanty published judicial practice of that period suggests. This early body of treaties may also have contributed to the emergence in the early 1960s of priority being accorded to Soviet treaties insofar as they contained rules providing otherwise than Soviet legislation. Whatever the volume of cases involving treaties that were considered by Soviet courts prior to 1991, the inclusion of Article 15(4) in the 1993 Russian Constitution transformed the situation. A further transformation occurred when the Russian Federation acceded to the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and began to participate in the deliberations of the European Court for Human Rights in Strasbourg.

Re Review of Constitutionality of Article 11 and Article 392(4) Items 3 and 4 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation

2021 ◽  
Vol 194 ◽  
pp. 487-502
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
European Court ◽  
Municipal Law ◽  
The Russian Federation

487Relationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Judgments of European Court of Human Rights — Execution of judgments of European Court of Human Rights — Russian judgments — Whether European Court of Human Rights’ judgments providing grounds for reconsideration of decision in a civil case where opposing decision of Constitutional Court existing — Russian law — Article 392(4) of Russian Civil Procedure Code — The law of the Russian Federation

scholarly journals CASE LAW OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN DECISIONS REGARDING NON-COMPLIANCE OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-46
Author(s):  
Dzhuzha О. M. ◽  
◽  
Melnychenko І. P. ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Life Imprisonment ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The article provides a legal analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in such cases like “Vinter and Others v. The United Kingdom”, “Hutchinson v. The United Kingdom”. The European Court of Human Rights has established key standards for those sentenced to life imprisonment, compliance with which will ensure that this type of punishment meets the requirements of the Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Such standards are: 1) sentencing of life imprisonment is not prohibited and does not conflict with the Article 3 or any other article of the Convention. The imposition of “non-reducible” life imprisonment may raise questions of compliance with the requirements of the Article 3 of the Convention; 2) in decision making whether life imprisonment can be considered as “non-reducible”, it is necessary to establish whether the person convicted to life imprisonment had any prospect of release. If national law provides for the possibility of reviewing life imprisonment regarding its mitigating, reducing, terminating or releasing, this is sufficient to satisfy the requirements of th Article 3 of the Convention; 3) for the purposes of the Article 3 of the Convention it is sufficient that life imprisonment is reducible de jure and de facto; 4) European penitentiary policy is currently focusing on the correctional purpose of imprisonment, in particular until the end of long prison sentences; 5) at the very beginning of the sentence a person convicted to life imprisonment has the right to know what he must do to consider the possibility of his release and under what conditions the sentence will be reviewed or also in what order a request to this may be made; 6) if domestic law does not provide for any mechanism or possibility to review life imprisonment, then the non-compliance with the requirements of the Article 3 of the Convention occurs at the time of imposition of life imprisonment and not at a later stage. The importance of such standards separating of the European Court of Human Rights for the national theory and practice of life imprisonment is that these provisions are effective guidelines for determining the prospects of releasing from sentencing in the form life imprisonment. Key words: European Court of Human Rights, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, case law, convict, life imprisonment.

scholarly journals The Relationship between the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation: Conflicting Conceptions of Sovereignty in Strasbourg and St Petersburg

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 933-959 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Kahn
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Interpretive Authority ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Russia eagerly ratified the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in 1998. Twenty years later, the chair of its Constitutional Court now expresses resentment at the subordination of Russian sovereignty. A new law expands his Court’s jurisdiction to deny effect to judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, an unprecedented power that has already been used twice. This article analyses this law and its application in its first two years. Both the claim of ‘subordination’ and the Russian response to it, in law and practice, rest on weak legal ground. But Russia’s action also raises deeper theoretical and practical questions for the ECHR as a ‘living instrument’ subject to the ‘evolutive’ interpretations of the Strasbourg Court. If other member states mimic Russia’s response to these issues, a European human rights system premised on the final interpretive authority of an international court could come to its end.

scholarly journals Applying the European Convention on Human Rights to the Conflict in Ukraine

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 8-78
Author(s):  
Stuart Wallace ◽  
Conall Mallory
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Armed Groups ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
State Actors ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Different Parts

The“annexation” of Crimea by the Russian Federation and the ongoing conflict in Eastern Ukraine have resulted in widespread human rights abuses. Both Ukraine and the Russian Federation are signatories to the European Convention on Human Rights and the Convention should apply within the territory and to the conflict. However, recent applications to the European Court of Human Rights reveal a great deal of confusion over which State bears responsibility for protecting human rights in different parts of Ukraine. This article seeks to shine a light on this problem presenting a deep analysis of the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence and discussing how it applies to both the conflict in Eastern Ukraine and “annexed” Crimea. It addresses salient issues such as responsibility for the actions of non-state actors and armed groups in Eastern Ukraine and whether the legality of the “annexation” has any bearing on the human rights obligations of each State. The article presents a detailed critique of recent judgments from the European Court of Human Rights arguing that the jurisprudence of the Court has created a bewildering degree of complexity and uncertainty as to the obligations of each State and discussing the practical implications of this uncertainty.

scholarly journals The right to free elections in the practice of the European court of human rights affecting the interests of the Russian Federation

2019 ◽  
pp. 26-32
Author(s):  
Анастасия Миловидова ◽  
Anastasiya Milovidova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
Statistical Data ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Electoral Law

The author analyzes statistical data on the practice of the European court of human rights in the sphere of electoral law and also describes individual cases, including the complaints against the Russian Federation, communicated by court in 2017.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document