Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights Concerning the Protection of Minorities, July 2012 to August 2014

2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 197-222
Author(s):  
Bill Bowring

This article highlights a number of interesting and significant cases concerning minority rights at the Strasbourg Court during the recent period of just over two years. The issues include the continuing deadlock in enforcing the Court’s controversial antidiscrimination judgment in Sejdic and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina; a new emphasis on and attention to social and economic rights as protected by the Revised Social Charter in the context of forced evictions; the Court’s expanding jurisprudence on the positive duties of the state; the fascinating Slovenian case on the fate of the “erased;” and a continuing focus on discrimination against Chechens as part of the Court’s recent return to a focus on the long-neglected Article 14 of the Convention. The article concludes by summarising a new scholarly interpretation of minority rights through the concept of vulnerability.

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Nedim Begović

Abstract The article analyses the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on accommodation of Islamic observances in the workplace. The author argues that the Court has not hitherto provided adequate incentives to the states party to the European Convention on Human Rights to accommodate the religious needs of Muslim employees in the workplace. Given this finding, the author proposes that the accommodation of Islam in the workplace should, as a matter of priority, be provided within a national legal framework. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, this could be achieved through an instrument of contracting agreement between the state and the Islamic Community in Bosnia and Herzegovina.


2020 ◽  
Vol 93 (4) ◽  
pp. 161-169
Author(s):  
I. I. Chesnitskiy ◽  

The article presents an analysis of the state and problems of implementing the socio-economic rights of population of the Khabarovsk territory as a priority area for reducing poverty. Attention of the authorities was drawn to the situation of poverty in a number of northern municipalities, where the population is experiencing difficulties in realizing their socio-economic rights due to the lack of jobs. Concern was expressed about the socio-economic rights of persons released from the places of deprivation of liberty. The Commissioner for human rights in the Khabarovsk territory, taking into account the study of situation in the region, sets out his vision for solving the problem of reducing poverty in the Khabarovsk territory and makes proposals that, in his opinion, can be used by the regional state authorities to achieve the indicators set by the President of the Russian Federation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-101
Author(s):  
Dmitry Kuznetsov

When establishing human rights violations committed by the state, should it be violation of internationally protected rights or constitutional rights, the violator is obliged to compensate for the harm caused. In the meantime, neither international sources, nor national legal acts and case law answer the question whether the obligation to compensate is exhausted by the compensation awarded in accordance with a decision of an international judicial body or such a payment has punitive nature, and the state keeps the obligation to compensate the damage within the frameworks of national proceedings. Following the first part of opening remarks the second part of the article studies universal international law approach towards the state obligation to compensate for human rights violations, it reviews positions of the International Court of Justice, the model established in international customary law of international responsibility. The third part discusses the compensation mechanism of the European Court of Human Rights and a number of cases where the Russian Federation was the respondent state. The forth part considers national regulation of the Council of Europe states and case law thereof. The author argues that the established international case law in respect of awarding compensations for human rights violations is too restrictive – it does not take into account a complex nature of this phenomenon which includes both correction of the individual applicant situation (restitution of the pre-existed situation) and prevention of similar situations in the future. It is concluded that awarding the compensation by an international body primarily constitutes a measure of international responsibility whereas consideration by a national court is a more effective means of restitution of the applicants rights and that the national court shall not deny consideration of applicants claims due to the fact that they have already been awarded compensation by the international judicial body including the European Court of Human Rights.


2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 445-473
Author(s):  
Marta Szuniewicz

Recently the European Court of Human Rights has been challenged with questions concerning the scope of the State’s responsibility for violations of human rights that occurred on international waters. The complaints concern the international fight on illicit drug trafficking, piracy and illegal immigration. The analysed case law provides that occurrences on international waters constitute cases of extraterritorial jurisdiction and may engage responsibility of the State under the echr in the events that take place on board a vessel flying its flag (jurisdiction de iure) and in case of occurrences that happen on board foreign vessels, if the State exercises an effective control over a ship or its crew (jurisdiction de facto). Unfortunately, the Court’s findings prove difficult to follow in a few points as the judges applied the Strasboaurg standard too strictly, irrespective of the practical challenges of maritime law-enforcement operations and existing institutions of the law of the sea.


The article is devoted to the study of such sources of electoral law in Ukraine as the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the first Protocol to the Convention and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The legal nature of these international sources of suffrage in Ukraine is considered. Attention is drawn to the peculiarities of the wording of the right to free election in Article 3 the first Protocol to the Convention. The peculiarities of the application of the above article by the European Court of Human Rights are disclosed. The importance the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of suffrage in Ukraine is emphasized. This assertion is justified by the fact that the rules of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and its Protocols are of a general and abstract nature and are interpreted and filled with real meaning in judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, which are of precedent nature. A number of legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights concerning the obligation of the state to organize and hold democratic elections, enshrined in the specific decisions of this international judicial institution, have been analyzed. In the article were covered such legal positions as: the possibility of limiting the suffrage of citizens, provided that such conditions do not interfere with the free expression of the people's opinion on the election of the legislative body; evaluation of the electoral legislation in the light of the political development of the country, taking into account national characteristics; wide discretion of the state in the choice of the electoral system, which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people, etc. There are a number of unresolved issues regarding the application of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights in judicial and administrative practice in Ukraine, one of which is the possible conflict between the case-law of the Court and the rules of Ukrainian law. It is proposed to resolve this conflict at the legislative level. The conclusions focus on the peculiarities of the legal nature of these sources of suffrage in Ukraine. KEY WORDS: sources of suffrage, Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, right to free elections.


2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-369
Author(s):  
Veronika Fikfak

AbstractThis article studies how the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR, the Court) adjusts damages for human rights violations. The article empirically analyses 13 years of ECtHR’s case law in relation to Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (torture, inhuman and degrading treatment), and 5 (arbitrary detention) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR, the Convention). The goal is to understand whether the statements made by the Court about the aims pursued through just satisfaction are confirmed in practice. Through an empirical quantitative study relating to non-pecuniary damages, the article analyses the practice of the Court in awarding non-pecuniary damages for human rights violations and compares it to the competing visions of the ECtHR’s function. In particular, I am interested in determining whether just satisfaction is aimed at redressing the suffering of the victim, her circumstances and vulnerability, or whether the focus is more on the respondent state, its conduct and its past human rights record. The answers to these questions will contribute to the debate whether the ECtHR’s role is one of delivering ‘individual justice’ or whether the Court is – as an international court enforcing an international treaty – focused on the ‘state’.


2015 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 415-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jaka Kukavica ◽  
Veronika Fikfak

AFTER McCann and Others v the United Kingdom (Application no. 18984/91) (1995) ECHR 31, in which the European Court of Human Rights first read into Article 2 the procedural obligation of effective investigation, Mustafa Tunç and Fecire Tunç (Application no. 24014/05), 14 April 2015, is perhaps one the most interesting decisions on the nature of the obligation to conduct an effective investigation in the Court's recent history. The Court, through its case law, has clarified that, when individuals have been killed by the state or a private party, the Contracting Parties have to undertake an investigation under Article 2, which has to be independent, adequate, prompt, and publicly scrutinised. It has been unclear, however, whether the element of independence had to meet criteria similar to those under Article 6, which guarantees a fair trial, or whether a lower standard was sufficient for an investigation to be considered effective in the context of Article 2. The Strasbourg court went back and forth on the issue (even adopting an absolutist approach in Al-Skeini and Others v the United Kingdom (Application no. 55721/07) (2011) ECHR 1093) and it was not until Mustafa Tunç that the issue of independence under Article 2 was addressed head-on.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (6(75)) ◽  
pp. 52-59
Author(s):  
Taisa Tomlyak

The article considers the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter - Сourt). In particular, the decision of the Сourt in cases of legality of interference with property rights was examined in the light of the provisions of Protocol № 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter Protocol №1 to the Convention). Also, the article specifies the principles that, in the opinion of the Сourt, the state must adhere to when interfering in property rights. In addition, it is established that the concept of "property" within the meaning of Part 1 of Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention has an independent meaning. That is, this concept cannot depend on its legal classification in national law and cannot be limited to ownership of things. Also, we considered a broad understanding in the practice of the Сourt "interests of society" in the application of measures of deprivation of property rights and ensuring a proportional relationship between the goal and the means used. In addition, the relationship between Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 and other articles of the Convention is considered, as issues arising in connection with the use of one's "property" may also relate to other articles of the Convention. Some decisions of the Court of Human Rights and its interpretation of the concepts of "property", "property" and "property rights" are analyzed.


2021 ◽  
pp. 39-54
Author(s):  
Mónika Márton

A pandemic can provide a textbook example for the restrictions of fundamental rights and freedoms. Romania has decided to derogate from the application of the European Convention on Human Rights during the state of emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The questions discussed in this paper are whether the derogation of Romania fulfils the criteria established by the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. If the answer is affirmative: does it have any effect on the inherent limitations on the freedom of expression as stated in art. 10 of ECHR?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document