History of the Communist Regime in the European Court of Human Rights Cases

2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vygantė Milašiūtė
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Communist Regime ◽  
European Court ◽  
History Of

Roboski and procedural rules: How the truth about a massacre was buried in the pages of history

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-503
Author(s):  
Kerem Altiparmak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Evidence ◽  
European Court ◽  
Procedural Error ◽  
History Of ◽  
Significant Question

Recently, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) issued an inadmissibility decision regarding the application concerning the Roboski massacre ( Selahattin Encü and Others v Turkey App no 49976/16, 17 May 2018) on the grounds that domestic remedies had not been exhausted. As observed in a number of earlier decisions, the ECtHR was resolutely confident about the decision of the Constitutional Court of Turkey on the matter. This unwavering trust has resulted in the once-and-for-all burial of the truth about one of the gravest massacres in the history of Turkey without a proper examination of the allegations of the applicants. Two differing views were put forward after the ECtHR’s decision. The first of these argued that the dismissal of a massacre of such magnitude for procedural reasons was unacceptable. Proponents of this view asserted that even if there were procedural grounds to find the application inadmissible, this could not be sufficient justification to prevent the truth from being revealed. Proponents of the second view argued that every court had its own procedures and that those who did not comply had to face the consequences. This article attempts to examine the second view on its own terms. In so doing, I will present the legal evidence and rationale showing that it is in fact the Constitutional Court of Turkey that has violated its own procedural rules. I will also argue that despite an acceptance of the second view, perhaps more markedly because of such acceptance, it is not possible to bury the truth about the Roboski massacre. This discussion will be guided by a more significant question: How is it that the Constitutional Court of Turkey made such a major procedural error in a case of such gravity and how is it that the ECtHR was so eager to uphold the error?

Transnational legal sites and democracy-building

2013 ◽  
Vol 39 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 471-486
Author(s):  
Seyla Benhabib
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Intellectual History ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Uniform System ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Regime ◽  
History Of ◽  
Democracy Building

Until recently the term ‘cosmopolitanism’ was a forgotten concept in the intellectual history of the 18th and 19th centuries. The last two decades have seen a remarkable revival of interest in cosmopolitanism across a wide variety of fields. This article contends that legal developments since the 1948 Declaration of Human Rights and the rise of an ‘international human rights regime’ are at the forefront of a new cosmopolitanism. Yet there is a great deal of skepticism toward such claims on the part of those who maintain that democracy and human rights are best furthered by the nation-state framework. Still others confuse legal cosmopolitanism with the spread of a uniform system of rights across different national jurisdictions. In several writings in the past, I developed the concept of ‘democratic iterations’ to argue against such skepticism as well as misunderstandings of legal cosmopolitanism. In this article, I show how democratic iterations unfold across transnational legal sites, which encompass various national jurisdictions and through which contentious dialogues on the application and interpretation of such fundamental rights as ‘freedom of religion’ in different jurisdictions can emerge. To document such processes I focus on the Leyla Sahin v. Turkey case which was adjudicated by the European Court of Human Rights in 2005.

scholarly journals Exploring the use of the concept human dignity in disability human rights law: from UNCRPD to EctHR

2021 ◽  
pp. 27-53
Author(s):  
Elif Celik
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Recent History ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
European Court ◽  
History Of

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) accommodates the concept of human dignity more fully than does any other human rights treaty. The role and interpretation of dignity is thus particularly interesting from the perspective of disability human rights and case law. This study examines the role and significance of the concept of dignity in relation to the human rights disability discourse and jurisdiction through the guidance and impact of the CRPD. It examines the currently available jurisprudence of the CRPD Committee and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in light of the CRPD, seeking to identify the rights that are particularly related to the concept of dignity through the perspective of disability and to identify the requirements of the respect for dignity for persons with disabilities. While accepting the limitations of the sources in this examination due to the recent history of the CRPD, the study nevertheless locates some points where human dignity has particular relevance to the realisation of the rights protected in the CRPD.

GENERAL LEGAL ESSENCE OF THE DOCTRINE OF POISONED TREE FRUIT AS A MAIN ASPECT IN THE INSTITUTE'S SYSTEM OF ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larysa Bayrachna ◽  
◽  
Yurii Burdai ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
History Of Development ◽  
Legal Literature ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Tree Fruit ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Law

The article presents a critical analysis of the doctrine of "poisoned tree" through the prism of its interpretation by the European Court of Human Rights, scientific and practical approach to its formation by the case law of Ukrainian national courts, in particular, but not limited to, the Supreme Court. Given the requirements of current procedural legislation of Ukraine. An overview of the basic standards and aspects of the standard established by the institute of admissibility of evidence in their entirety and individually. The institute of admissibility of evidence has a long history of development. To date, the inadmissibility of evidence obtained in violation of procedural law is enshrined at the European judicial level in such judgments of the European Court of Human Rights as Gefgen v. Germany, Teixeira de Castro v. Portugal, and Sabelnik v. Ukraine. against Ukraine", "Nechyporuk and Yonkalo against Ukraine", "Yaremenko against Ukraine". This requirement for the admissibility of evidence is formulated in the above-mentioned Decisions quite succinctly and clearly, and is currently the subject of its implementation in both the law-making system and the law enforcement system. In the legal literature, there is still a discussion about the doctrine of "poisoned tree fruit", which is directly related to the recognition of derivatives of evidence obtained in violation of Ukrainian law - inadmissible. In the course of the study, uncertainty was found that the implementation of this doctrine is necessary only when the violation of the conditions of admissibility calls into question the reliability of the evidence. Therefore, it is necessary to determine whether there is a dependence of the admissibility and reliability of the evidence or the "fruits of the poisoned tree" appear under other conditions, when the evidence is declared inadmissible, regardless of this impact on the reliability.

Romania

2019 ◽  
pp. 359-378
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Communist Regime ◽  
World War ◽  
National Minorities ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Holocaust ◽  
Communal Property ◽  
Second Wave

Romania was allied with Germany for most of World War II. Extensive “Romanianization” (akin to Germany’s Aryanization) of Jewish property took place. More than 400,000 Romanian Jews died during the Holocaust. After switching sides in the war, Romania promptly enacted legislation to reverse the theft of property. Little was done, however, to act on these commitments during the Communist regime (1945–1989). Instead, widespread nationalization resulted in a second wave of confiscation. Restitution only began to take place after 1989. However, restitution laws have not been effectively applied, and to date only limited restitution has taken place in Romania. A 2013 restitution law was recognized by the European Court of Human Rights as providing, in theory, an accessible and effective framework for the restitution of nationalized or confiscated property. In the post-Communist period, Romania has enacted a number of laws relating to the restitution of communal property belonging to religious organizations and national minorities. These laws chiefly cover communal property taken during the Communist era. Romania endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Regulierungen der Religionsfreiheit

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans G. Kippenberg
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Religious Studies ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
History Of Religion ◽  
European Court ◽  
Foreign Policies ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Eu

Article 18 on the freedom of religion in the Declaration of Human Rights from 1948 presented religious studies with the task of rethinking its concept of religion. Through it, religious organisations were granted inviolable rights. Now religion is also manifesting itself in international religious NGOs, whose public activities have made them global players and, as a result, possible partners in or even opponents of states’ foreign policies. The majority of studies on religious freedom do not go beyond Article 18 and its emergence. They rarely examine the question of how it should be implemented in the further explanations and institutions of the UN and those of the EU, and thus constitute a void in research into the history of religion, religious sociology, religious studies and theology. In this study, the author focuses on how freedom of religion has been realised and regulated both in terms of universal and European human rights as well as in the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

The European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nussberger Angelika
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Second World War ◽  
World War ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
European Court ◽  
New Development ◽  
History Of ◽  
Post War ◽  
The Great War ◽  
Second World

After more than thirty years of horror from the outbreak of the Great War in 1914 to the conclusion of Second World War in 1945, the European general population and political leadership thought it absolutely necessary that post-war institutions be created that would make a third European world war less likely. This book introduces us to one such institution, the European Court of Human Rights. The book explores its uniqueness as an international adjudicatory body in the light of its history, structure, and procedure, as well as its key doctrinal usages. It also shows the Court to be an exciting and instructive new development of modern international law and human rights law. The book traces the history of the Court from its political context in the 1940s to the present day, answering pressing questions about its origins and internal workings. What was the best model for such an international organization? How should it evolve within more and more diverse legal cultures? How does a case move among different decision-making bodies? These questions help frame the six parts of the book, whilst the final section reflects on the past successes and failures of the Court, shedding light on possible future directions.

The Legal Personality of Individuals in International Human Rights Law

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Astrid Kjeldgaard-Pedersen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
Legal Personality ◽  
European Court ◽  
History Of ◽  
International Human ◽  
International Legal Personality

Following a summary presentation of some key events in the history of international human rights law before the Second World War, Chapter 7 concentrates on one prominent example within the field of international human rights law, namely the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Section 7.2 deals in turn with three core issues. First, Section 7.2.1 describes the evolution of the procedural status of individuals before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and assesses the role of the concept of international legal personality in that regard. Section 7.2.2 studies the Court’s practice concerning the interpretation of the ECHR, including the margin of appreciation doctrine. Finally, Section 7.2.3 analyses the practice of the ECtHR as regards the place of the Convention in the international legal system.

Incompatible Contrasts? — Preventive Detention in Germany and the European Convention on Human Rights

2010 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 1046-1066 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grischa Merkel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Present Situation ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Preventive Detention ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Legal Problems ◽  
European Court ◽  
Public Pressure ◽  
History Of

AbstractThis article will give an overview of the idea and history of origins of preventive detention and the legal changes in the German Criminal Code that underlie the decision of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) (17 December 2009). It will attempt an outlook by considering the prospective outcome of future law suits against German legal statutes relating to preventive detention, and will also describe the present situation and current legal recommendations, including the much-discussed alternative of detention in psychiatric wards. The article will close with a brief comparative look at the related legal problems arising in countries with a criminal law which is based on the establishment of personal guilt of the offender while facing public pressure to detain persons for protective reasons.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document