scholarly journals THE RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL IN PROCEEDINGS CHALLENGING THE MINUTES OF DISPUTING CONTRAVENTIONS

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adriana-Florina Bălăşoiu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Right

The offenses field is assimilated to the criminal one from the perspective of theEuropean Court of Human Rights, in the sense of article 6 of the Convention, the personaccused of committing an act regarded in national law as an offense must benefit from theguarantees specific to criminal proceedings.

ANONIMNI SVEDOCI I ZAŠTITA LjUDSKIH PRAVA

2021 ◽  
pp. 277-296
Author(s):  
Veljko Turanjanin ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Step Test ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
National Legislation ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Insufficient Knowledge

Тhe author deals with the problem of anonymous witnesses in the context of the right to a fair trial in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. One of the problems in the application of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights is related to the testimonies of anonymous witnesses in criminal proceedings. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights has developed certain criteria that must be followed in national legislation, but it is obvious that there is insufficient knowledge regarding this problem, as well as the reluctance to apply the mentioned rules. The standards developed by the ECtHR are very important for national laws and jurisprudence. The author explains the development of a three-step test that needs to be examined when assessing a violation of the right to a fair trial, through an analysis of a multitude of judgments, in order to provide guidance on the application of Article 6 § 3 (d) of the European Convention on Human Rights. After introductory considerations, the author explains who can be a witness under the Convention, since this question is raised independently of national legislation, and then explains the right to examine witnesses, the admissibility of testimonies by anonymous witnesses and the examination of the three-stage test, and gives concluding remarks.

Remote Participation in Criminal Proceedings: Does the Reformed Italian Regulation Represent an Application Extension Able to Conflict with the Right to a Fair Trial?

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-201
Author(s):  
Giulia Angiolini
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Italian Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Recent Reform ◽  
The Right ◽  
Remote Participation

The purpose of this paper is to try to analyse the Italian regulation of accused persons’ remote participation in criminal proceedings. The interest in this matter arises from the suspected frictions of the provisions at hand with fundamental rights to be guaranteed for a fair trial. These suspicions, aroused right after the introduction of the institute in Italian law, have been increased by the recent reform of the discipline of remote participation, and they become even clearer after a comparison of Italian regulation with those of other European Countries. Hence, an inescapable question occurs: will the European Court of Human Rights and the Italian Constitutional Court save the new regulation as they did with the previous one?

scholarly journals Wybrane zagadnienia dotyczące zwalczania terroryzmu w kontekście prawa do rzetelnego procesu

2019 ◽  
pp. 163-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magdalena Matusiak-Frącczak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
International Peace ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Targeted Killing ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Peace And Security ◽  
The Right

Terrorism is nowadays one of the biggest threats to international peace and security. Nevertheless, its combatting must be compatible with the requirements of human rights protection, including the right to a fair trial. First the article discusses procedural guarantees of suspects of terrorist crimes in criminal proceedings. Then the article deliberates the aspects of judicial control of targeted sanctions. The next part will constitute the exploration of the legal professional privilege in the discussed area. Finally, the article will discuss the judicial control of targeted killing. The aim of the article is to prove that actually the right to a fair trial and the procedural guarantees enshrined therein constitute a guarantee to other human rights.

scholarly journals Slepenu izmeklēšanas metožu lietošanas principu attiecināmība uz likumā “Par policiju” paredzētā kontrolpirkuma izpildi

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (17) ◽  
pp. 89-107
Author(s):  
Mārcis Grinciuns
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
European Court ◽  
Investigation Methods ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Secret Investigation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Police Control

Rakstā tiek pētīta Eiropas Cilvēktiesību tiesas (ECT) pausto slepeno izmeklēšanas metožu (undercover operations) izpildes principu attiecināmība uz likumā “Par policiju” noteiktā kontrolpirkuma (turpmāk rakstā – policijas kontrolpirkums) izpildi. Policijas kontrolpirkums galvenokārt tiek veikts, lai atklātu administratīvos pārkāpumus, kuru izskatīšana nav piekritīga ECT, jo Cilvēka tiesību un pamatbrīvību aizsardzības konvencijas (turpmāk rakstā – Konvencija) 6. pantā noteiktās tiesības uz taisnīgu tiesu paredzētas apsūdzētajiem krimināllietās [1, angļu valodas versija]. Taču atsevišķos gadījumos arī administratīvais pārkāpums (vai disciplinārpārkāpums) var būt piekritīgs ECT kompetencei – tas atkarīgs no tā, kāda rakstura pārkāpums tiek izmeklēts un kāds sods par tā izdarīšanu paredzēts. ECT ir definējusi trīs kritērijus, pēc kuriem tā vērtē, vai pārkāpums atbilst krimināla pārkāpuma būtībai un ir piekritīgs Konvencijas 6. pantam. Aktuāls ir jautājums, vai likumpārkāpumi, kuru izmeklēšanā ir paredzēts izmantot policijas kontrolpirkumu, ir piekritīgi Konvencijas 6. pantam, un, ja tā, vai policijas kontrolpirkuma normatīvais regulējums ir atbilstošs ECT paustajiem slepenu izmeklēšanas metožu lietojuma principiem (nosacījumiem). The article examines the relevance of the principles of the use of secret investigation methods (undercover operations) expressed by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) to the test-purchase measure set out in the Law “On police” (police test-purchase). The police test-purchase mainly is used to detect administrative offences which are not subject to review by the ECHR, since the right to a fair trial provided in Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Convention) is reserved for defendants in criminal proceedings. The question is whether the offences, where police test-purchase is used as part of investigation, are subject to Article 6 of the Convention, and if so, whether the regulatory framework for police control is in line with the principles (conditions) of the use of secret investigative methods expressed by the ECHR.

scholarly journals The Right to a Fair Trial before The European Court of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. p133
Author(s):  
Alaa Mohamed Ismail Abdrabo
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
New Work ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
European Court ◽  
Criminal Charges ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) guarantees the right to a fair trial, applies to disputes relating to civil rights and obligations as well as to criminal charges. The right to a fair trial includes, inter alia, the right of access to a court, the right to be heard and the equality of arms between the parties. This challenging new work elucidates the meaning of the fair trial and looks at the fair trials jurisprudence of the ECHR.Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights has become the defining standard within Europe for determining the fairness of criminal proceedings. Its success has been attributed to the fact that it is not based on a particular model of criminal procedure.

scholarly journals Principle of the Rule of Law in the Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights

1970 ◽  
pp. 373-379
Author(s):  
Tetiana Tsuvina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the interpretation of the principle of rule of law in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The concept of the rule of law, along with democracy and human rights makes up the three pillars of the Council of Europe and is endorsed in the Preamble to the ECHR. The Preamble to the ECHR states that the governments of European countries are like-minded and have a common heritage of political traditions, ideals, freedom and the rule of law. The rights most obviously connected to the rule of law include: the right of access to justice, the right to a fair trial, the legal principle that measures which impose a burden should not have retroactive effects the right to an effective remedy, anyone accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proved guilty etc. The author concludes that there is an expediency of grouping separate requirements of the rule of law in the practice of the ECtHR around concepts, which are concluded to be elements of the rule of law in a democratic society. Such elements of the rule of law in the practice of the ECHR are recognized as legality, legal certainty, fairness of a trial and the priority of human rights. Legality supposes that authorities need a legal basis for measures which interfere with a right of an individual, as well as quality requirement for the law such as accessibility, foreseeability and no arbitrariness. Legal certainty encompasses foreseeability in application of the law; non-retroactivity of legislation; the principle of res judicata; mandatory execution of court decisions and consistency of judicial practice. Fair trial requirements devoted into two groups: general requirements (access to court, independent and impartial tribunal, execution of court decisions etc.) and requirements for criminal proceedings (presumption of innocence, principle nullum crimen sine lege etc.) It is noted that the legality, legal certainty, fairness of a trial are formal requirements of the rule of law, thus the priority of human rights is a substantive (material) requirement of the rule of law. The aforementioned testifies to the natural-legal approach that the ECHR is guided by in interpreting the rule of law in its practice, understanding it primarily as the rule of human rights.

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.

The Inviolability of Diplomatic Agents in the Context of Employment

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Rodgers
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Employment Contracts ◽  
Domestic Servants ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
Diplomatic Immunity ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Way

‘Ordinary’ employment contracts—including those of domestic servants—have been deemed to attract diplomatic immunity because they fall within the scope of diplomatic functions. This chapter highlights the potential for conflict between these forms of immunity and the rights of the employees, and reflects on cases in which personal servants of diplomatic agents have challenged both the existence of immunity and the scope of its application. The chapter examines claims that the exercise of diplomatic immunity might violate the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the way in which courts have dealt with these issues. The chapter analyses diplomats’ own employment claims and notes that they are usually blocked by the assertion of immunity, but also reflects on more recent developments in which claims had been considered which were incidental to diplomatic employment (eg Nigeria v Ogbonna [2012]).

Does the Injunction Gap Violate Implementers’ Fair Trial Rights Under the ECHR?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léon E Dijkman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Federal Supreme ◽  
Validity Of A Patent

Abstract Germany is one of few jurisdictions with a bifurcated patent system, under which infringement and validity of a patent are established in separate proceedings. Because validity proceedings normally take longer to conclude, it can occur that remedies for infringement are imposed before a decision on the patent’s validity is available. This phenomenon is colloquially known as the ‘injunction gap’ and has been the subject of increasing criticism over the past years. In this article, I examine the injunction gap from the perspective of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. I find that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights interpreting this provision supports criticism of the injunction gap, because imposing infringement remedies with potentially far-reaching consequences before the validity of a patent has been established by a court of law arguably violates defendants’ right to be heard. Such reliance on the patent office’s grant decision is no longer warranted in the light of contemporary invalidation rates. I conclude that the proliferation of the injunction gap should be curbed by an approach to a stay of proceedings which is in line with the test for stays as formulated by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court. Under this test, courts should stay infringement proceedings until the Federal Patent Court or the EPO’s Board of Appeal have ruled on the validity of a patent whenever it is more likely than not that it will be invalidated.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document