17 Are We Headed in the Right Direction? Reflections on the New (2001) Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Light of the Experience of the European System

2009 ◽  
pp. 385-442
Author(s):  
Christina M. Cerna
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European System ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Right

Disparaging Language (ex curia) as a Barrier in Individual Complaints before the European Court of Human Rights (Zhdanov v Russia)—Lessons for the African System?

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Angelo Dube
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
European System ◽  
African Charter ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Right ◽  
Court Process ◽  
Individual Petition ◽  
African Commission

On 16 July 2019, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) rejected an application by Russian human rights activist, Nikolay Alekseyev, on the basis that he had published personally offensive and threatening material online, directed towards the ECtHR. This was in the matter of Zhdanov and Others v Russia Applications Nos 12200/08, 35949/11 and 58282/12. Even though the published material fell afoul of the European Convention in that it amounted to an abuse of the court process, nothing offensive was contained in the applicant’s own submissions before the court. In like fashion to the ECtHR’s admissibility requirements, the African Charter contains a much more pointed exclusionary clause which renders inadmissible any communication that contains disparaging or insulting language. The difference between the two systems is that the European system relies on an open-ended concept of ‘abuse of the right of individual petition’, whilst the African system specifically proscribes insulting language. In this article, I analyse the approach of the ECtHR in the Zhdanov matter, and contrast it with the approach of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the African Commission) under Article 56(3) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. I further interrogate whether there were any instances where, in similar fashion to the Zhdanov matter, the African Commission declared a communication inadmissible on account of insulting language occurring externally, and not contained within the submission itself. Alive to the fact that the concept of ‘abuse’ in the European system is wide, the article is limited to cases in which the abuse of the right of individual petition under the European Convention manifests in disparaging or insulting language.

scholarly journals The ICTY and the Right to a Fair Trial: A Critique of the Critics

1997 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivia Q. Swaak-Goldman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Right ◽  
Death Knell

In recent publications a rising tide of criticism directed against the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) is discernible, principally concerning whether or not the ICTY grants the accused a fair trial. The perceived lack of ability, or willingness, to satisfy the highest standards of human rights concerning the right of accused to a fair trial is regarded as a death-knell both for the broad acceptance of the ICTY's jurisprudence as well as the prospects for a permanent international criminal court. While most of the criticism centres around the interpretation and application of provisions of the ICTY's Statute and Rules of Procedure and Evidence addressing the right to a fair trial, some of it concerns the vigorousness with which ICTY officials insist upon the surrender of indicted persons. With all due respect these commentators, by applying norms that are not wholly applicable, misconceive the threat to the accused's fair trial rights.

scholarly journals Nagorno-Karabakh in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-123
Author(s):  
Aleksa Nikolic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
The People ◽  
European Court ◽  
European System ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right

The paper analyses the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh from the point of view of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) regarding the violation of human rights of the warring parties directly related to the disputed territory. The European system of human rights protection is one of the greatest European achievements in the field of law, especially if we keep in mind that its judgments are binding on the signatories of the European Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms (ECHR), thus giving it suprajudicial power. Through the analysis of two cases, Sargsyan vs Azerbaijan and Chiragov and others vs Armenia, the Court addressed some very interesting issues that may encourage different interpretations of the European Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms (ECHR), but also directly affect the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. In this regard, the analysis of the (non) existence of the right of the people of Nagorno- Karabakh to self-determination is especially interesting and significant. The author concludes that the ECtHR in its judgments has taken certain positions that may be of great importance in resolving the status of Nagorno-Karabakh before the international community and international organisations.

Council of Europe

1951 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 811-813
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Right ◽  
Schuman Plan ◽  
Church Schools

At a meeting in Strasbourg during the first week of August 1951, the Committee of Ministers made the following decisions: 1) referred back to a committee of experts the problem of refugees; 2) approved the addition of clauses guaranteeing the right to hold property, the right of parents to send their children to church schools and the right to participate in free elections, to the European Convention on Human Rights; 3) agreed to a change in the rules of procedure permitting the ministers, by unanimous decision, to allow those states having no interest in a particular action to abstain from voting on it. This last change would permit such projects as the Schuman Plan to be approved by ministers of the interested countries without involving others.

Tourism as a Tool for the Fulfilment of the Rights to Rest and Leisure Enshrined in Article No. 24 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 76 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 180-188
Author(s):  
Bianca Nicla Romano
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Universal Declaration ◽  
Title V ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Real Right ◽  
Right To Work ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right ◽  
Italian Constitution

Art. 24 of the 1948 Declaration of Human Rights recognises and protects the right of the individual to rest and leisure. This right has to be fully exercised without negative consequences on the right to work and the remuneration. Tourism can be considered one of the best ways of rest and leisure because it allows to enrich the personality of the individual. Even after the reform of the Title V this area is no longer covered by the Italian Constitution, the Italian legal system protects and guarantees it as a real right, so as to get to recognize its existence and the consequent compensation of the so-called “ruined holiday damage”. This kind of damage has not a patrimonial nature, but a moral one, and the Tourist-Traveler can claim for it when he has not been able to fully enjoy his holiday - the essential fulcrum of tourism - intended as an opportunity for leisure and/or rest, essential rights of the individual.

A Call for Public Participation in the Treaty-making Process in South Africa: What can South Africa Learn from the Kingdom of Thailand?

2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Retselisitsoe Phooko
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Future Situation ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Government ◽  
Personal Jurisdiction

On 2 August 2002 South Africa signed the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Protocol on Tribunal and the Rules of Procedure Thereof, thus effectively recognising and accepting the jurisdiction of the SADC Tribunal. Among the cases received by the SADC Tribunal was a complaint involving allegations of human rights violations by the government of Zimbabwe. It ruled that the government of Zimbabwe had violated human rights. Consequently, Zimbabwe mounted a politico-legal challenge against the existence of the Tribunal. This resulted in the review of the role and functions of the Tribunal in 2011 which resulted in the Tribunal being barred from receiving new cases or proceeding with the cases that were already before it. Furthermore, on 18 August 2014, the SADC Summit adopted and signed the 2014 Protocol on the Tribunal in the SADC which disturbingly limits personal jurisdiction by denying individual access to the envisaged Tribunal, thus reducing it to an inter-state judicial forum. This article critically looks at the decision of 18 August 2014, specifically the legal implications of the Republic of South Africa’s signing of the 2014 Protocol outside the permissible procedure contained in article 37 of the SADC Protocol on the Tribunal. It proposes that South Africa should correct this democratic deficit by introducing public participation in treaty-making processes in order to prevent a future situation where the executive unilaterally withdraws from an international treaty that is meant to protect human rights at a regional level. To achieve this, this article makes a comparative study between South Africa and the Kingdom of Thailand to learn of any best practices from the latter.

CIVIL AND LEGAL LIABILITY OF JUDGES

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaroslav Skoromnyy ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Pension System ◽  
Legal Liability ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Model Code ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

The article presents the conceptual foundations of bringing judges to civil and legal liability. It was found that the civil and legal liability of judges is one of the types of legal liability of judges. It is determined that the legislation of Ukraine provides for a clearly delineated list of the main cases (grounds) for which the state is liable for damages for damage caused to a legal entity and an individual by illegal actions of a judge as a result of the administration of justice. It has been proved that bringing judges to civil and legal liability, in particular on the basis of the right of recourse, provides for the payment of just compensation in accordance with the decision of the European Court of Human Rights. It was established that the bringing of judges to civil and legal liability in Ukraine is regulated by such legislative documents as the Constitution of Ukraine, the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Explanatory Note to the European Charter on the Status of Judges (Model Code), the Law of Ukraine «On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges», the Law of Ukraine «On the procedure for compensation for harm caused to a citizen by illegal actions of bodies carrying out operational-search activities, pre-trial investigation bodies, prosecutors and courts», Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the case on the constitutional submission of the Supreme Court of Ukraine regarding the compliance of the Constitution of Ukraine (constitutionality) of certain provisions of Article 2, paragraph two of clause II «Final and transitional provisions» of the Law of Ukraine «On measures to legislatively ensure the reform of the pension system», Article 138 of the Law of Ukraine «On the judicial system and the status of judges» (the case on changes in the conditions for the payment of pensions and monthly living known salaries of judges lagging behind in these), the Law of Ukraine «On the implementation of decisions and the application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights».

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document