scholarly journals Judicial Control as a Guarantee of Non-Interference in Private Life During the Pretrial Investigation

Dixi ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Volodymyr I. Galagan ◽  
Serhii Ye. Ablamskyi ◽  
Zhаnnа V. Udovenko ◽  
Victoria V. Ablamska
Keyword(s):  
Justice System ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Topical Issue ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
European Court ◽  
Justice Process ◽  
Effective Role ◽  
The Right

The article is devoted to the topical issue of judicial control over non-interference in the private (personal and family) life of participants in criminal proceedings. The study was conducted in the context of the analysis of the practice of the ECHR, the legal positions of which should be consistently applied in criminal proceedings, evidence of this are the legal requirements on this issue. The notion and concept of judicial control is a necessity component that helps in guaranteeing the respect of human dignity and integrity. It is a common and established principle that, during the pre-trial process, it is the position of those ensuring justice in making sure that the life of persons is respected and safeguarded. It is noted that in accordance with the national legislation of Ukraine, judicial control is a separate function of the court's activities at the stage of pre-trial investigation, directly carried out by the investigating judge. The situation will become precarious and detrimental when the private life of persons is not respected to the fullest. Therefore, it is the responsibility of those ensuring public order during the pre-trial investigation phase in ensuring the respect of the private life of the presumed suspect for the proper implementation of the justice process. In ensuring this right, it is established that the empirical and analytical methods of research are necessary in order to show the effective role played by the European Court of Human Rights in respecting the right to private life during the interrogative phase of inquiry. From the findings, it is seen that, though the Court has played a prominent and pertinent role in the respect of private, the suspect continues in experiencing difficulties when it's private life is at at stake, and it always affects the extent of the justice system.

scholarly journals Should videoconference be elected over personal presence in criminal legal proceedings?

2021 ◽  
pp. 12-22
Author(s):  
Mariia Aleksandrovna Iurkevich
Keyword(s):  
Practical Experience ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Legal Proceeding ◽  
European Court ◽  
Entire Complex ◽  
The Right

This article analyzes the conditions and legal ramifications of application of videoconference in various forms of criminal legal proceedings, highlighting practical issues emerging in arrangement of participation of parties in criminal proceedings via videoconference calls. As a product of digital technologies, videoconference is examined not only as a formal means of communication used by parties to a legal proceeding, but also as one of the means of exercising the right to a fair trial. The object of this research consists of communication and procedural relations arising between the parties to a legal proceeding with application videoconference. The subject of this research covers the entire complex of fairly recent norms for the Russian criminal procedural regulation governing application of videoconference on various stages of criminal proceedings on a case. The article contains practical recommendations by indicators that should be considered in determining optimal forms of participation in a criminal proceeding, as well as actions of parties that must be undertaken if during application of videoconference, the rights of the defendant are violated or the standards of fair trial are not being met. The article complies answers to the most topical questions on videoconference calls, taking into the consideration practical experience of the author, as well as relevant case law of the Russian courts and the European Court of Human Rights. The conclusion is made that application of videoconference is allowable in legal proceedings of the courts of first instance and courts of appeal in criminal cases heard in special order, cassation instance, supervisory instance, in execution of sentence, as well as within the framework of judicial control at pretrial stage in a criminal case, but only if procedural guarantees could be provided to all parties of the proceedings. In a trial by jury such technology is unacceptable.

Taking of biological samples for expertise under the legislation of Ukraine and its conformity with EU standards

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 290-300
Author(s):  
Viktoriia V. Rohalska ◽  
Oksana M. Bronevytska ◽  
Halyna D. Boreiko ◽  
Iryna S. Shapovalova ◽  
Iryna R. Serkevych
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Biological Samples ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Medical Intervention ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
European Court ◽  
Procedural Code ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

The analysis of investigative and judicial practice shows that some lawyers regard the refusal of a person to provide voluntarily biological samples for examination as an execution of his/her right not to testify against him/herself. Analysis of the provisions of separate Judgements of the European Court on Human Rights allows us to conclude that the physical integrity of a person is covered by the concept of “private life” protected by Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and concerns the most intimate aspects of private life, and compulsory medical intervention, even insignificant, constitutes an interference with this right. Therefore, the criminalprocedural characteristic of obtaining of biological samples for expertise is given in the article. The authors analyzed and answered the questions: which particular samples should be attributed to biological ones, and whether it is possible to refuse to voluntarily granting of biological samples for examination in accordance to the realization of the right not to testify against him/herself. The possibility of obtaining of biological samples for examination from a person who is not a party to criminal proceedings or has not acquired procedural status has been considered. The article as well deals with the legality of obtaining of samples for examination before submitting information into the Unified Register of Pre-trial Investigations. The algorithm of actions of obtaining of biological samples for examination, including the compulsory order, is proposed. The following general scientific research methods were used: the dialectical method of legal phenomena, with the help of which the concept and the legal nature of biological samples for examination were studied; the comparative method – in the process of comparing the norms of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine (CPC) with the norms of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and decisions of the ECHR, etc.

scholarly journals CONCERNING DETENTION OF PERSONS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS: THE PRACTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Preventive Measure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

ANNOTATION: the article outlines the problematic issues of the institution of detention, clarifies its relationship with the constitutional human right to liberty and security of a person, reviews the practice of the European Court of Human Rights regarding detention, focuses on the violation of the principle of legal certainty in the current procedural legislation. It is fundamentally important in the study to determine the subjective composition of the persons who are detaining, in particular, the attention is focused on their procedural status, a position is considered regarding the limited terms of reference of authorized officials, in terms of the right to detention solely for committing a crime for which a penalty of imprisonment is provided, unlike persons holding legal detention who are authorized to detain a person in the commission of a criminal offense regardless of the severity. The article deals with the manipulation of procedural rules, which correlates with the so-called hidden purpose and occurs by substituting administrative detention in the understanding of criminal procedural legislation and is the basis for violation of human rights. The concept of immediate judicial control is considered and supported, which provides for an obligation on an authorized official to deliver a detained person directly to a court to resolve the issue of the legality of detention, bypassing the pre-trial investigation authorities, where the detained person is still long (60 hours, since this period should not be exceeded to deliver the detainee to the investigating judge, where a decision is made on the selection of a preventive measure against him), pressure may be applied. It is indicated that there is no clear and comprehensive definition of the category «authorized official» in the current Criminal Procedure Code, which leads to the problem of a which leads to the problem of a narrowed or broader interpretation of this concept. Proposals for its normative consolidation are presented. The work is fundamentally different in that specific problems became the basis for the study of domestic legislation, which were subsequently supported by the decisions of the ECHR, but today they remain in the current legislation anyway. This is a comprehensive approach to the issue of legislative imperfections, and it focuses the legislator’s attention on them.

What of the Child? Preventing the Publication of Children's Names After the Age of 18

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Sophy Baird
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Child Victims ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Right

Children are afforded a number of protections when they encounter the criminal justice system. The need for special protection stems from the vulnerable position children occupy in society. When children form part of the criminal justice system, either by being an offender, victim, or witness, they may be subjected to harm. To mitigate against the potential harm that may be caused, our law provides that criminal proceedings involving children should not be open to the public, subject to the discretion of the court. This protection naturally seems at odds with the principle of open justice. However, the courts have reconciled the limitation with the legal purpose it serves. For all the protection and the lengths that the law goes to protect the identity of children in this regard, it appears there is an unofficial timer dictating when this protection should end. The media have been at the forefront of this conundrum to the extent that they believe that once a child (offender, victim, or witness) turns 18 years old, they are free to reveal the child's identity. This belief, grounded in the right to freedom of expression and the principle of open justice, is at odds with the principle of child's best interests, right to dignity and the right to privacy. It also stares incredulously in the face of the aims of the Child Justice Act and the principles of restorative justice. Measured against the detrimental psychological effects experienced by child victims, witnesses, and offenders, this article aims to critically analyse the legal and practical implications of revealing the identity of child victims, witnesses, and offenders after they turn 18 years old.

Extradition Between European and African Countries: Overcoming the Challenges

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-319
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
African Countries ◽  
European Court ◽  
Real Risk ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

Although EU states use the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) for the purpose of surrendering a person who is accused of committing an offence or who has been convicted of an offence, they use extradition when dealing with countries outside the EU. However, they use surrender when dealing with the International Criminal Court (ICC). Thus, extradition is one of the ways in which African and European countries (especially EU members) are cooperating in the fight against crime. Case law from courts in some African and European countries and from the European Court of Human Rights, the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture, shows that extraditions between African and European countries have been delayed or hampered by allegations of human rights violations in the requesting state. These allegations have focused on mainly two rights: the right to a fair trial and the right to freedom from torture. The European Court of Human Rights has held that the extradition of a person should not go ahead if his or her trial was or will amount to a flagrant denial of justice or where there is a real risk of being subjected to torture. Although African courts and international human rights bodies have also held that extradition should not go ahead where there is a real risk that the person will be subjected to torture or where his/her trial will be unfair, they have not adopted the ‘flagrant denial of justice’ test. The case law also shows that some people have challenged the legal basis for their extradition. This article highlights this case law and suggests ways in which some of the challenges associated with extradition could be overcome. The article demonstrates that courts in some African and European countries have considered the nature of extradition enquiries. In some countries, such as Kenya, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings. However, in the United Kingdom, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings of a special type. There is consensus that extradition enquiries are not civil proceedings.

THE RIGHT TO AN INTIMATE, FAMILY AND PRIVATE LIFE IN THE JURISPRUDENCE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT ON HUMAN RIGHTS

2021 ◽  
pp. 142-151
Author(s):  
Iulia Butnaru ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Psychological Traits ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Family ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Right

Privacy often conflict with other rights and legitimate interests, at which is the question of establishing its boundaries. Obviously there are no clear limits beyond which an infringement must be regarded as permissible. Private life is a concept with an extensive interpretation, which includes different spheres of the person’s life, as demonstrated by the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. What is certain is that each person has their own opinion about the extent of privacy and this impression depends on the psychological traits of the person concerned, but also on the traditions and customs that exist in a society at a certain historical stage. The utility of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in the protection of private life and the family is that it provides precise criteria to be applied by judges to determine whether the complaint submitted under Article 8 of the Convention European Human Rights is one valid.

Part Two Rights, 5 Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Espinosa Manuel José Cepeda ◽  
Landau David
Keyword(s):  
Military Service ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Freedom Of Religion ◽  
Public Order ◽  
Public Officials ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Internal Armed Conflict ◽  
The Right

This chapter considers the Court’s jurisprudence on the freedom of speech and religion. The Court’s work on the freedom of speech examines familiar conflicts—such as between speech and public order, or speech and the privacy of reputation of others—but in an unfamiliar context where the Court has often had to contend with the implications of the country’s internal armed conflict. Thus, for example, the Court has had to weigh the damage that might be done by publishing the statements of illegal armed groups and the effect of statements linking public officials with those groups. The Court’s jurisprudence on freedom of religion had sought to recognize plurality in a climate where Catholicism has historically dominated public and private life. This chapter considers both the Court’s jurisprudence striking down core provisions of the Concordat treaty with Rome, and its recognition of the right of conscientious objection from military service.

The European Court of Human Rights has the Turkish Security Forces Held Responsible for Violations of Human Rights: The Case of Akdivar and Others

1997 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Zwaak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eastern Region ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Security Forces ◽  
South Eastern ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

In this article, special attention will be given to the recent judgment of the European Court of Human Right in the case of Akdivar and Others v. Turkey. Since 1985, a violent conflict has raged in the South-Eastern region of Turkey, between the Turkish security forces and sections of the Kurdish population in favour of Kurdish autonomy, in particular members of the PKK (Workers' Party of Kurdistan). Since 1987, 10 of the 11 provinces of South-Eastern Turkey have been subjected to emergency rule, which was in force at the time of the facts complained of. The main issue in this case concerned the fact that during this conflict, a large number of villages have been destroyed and evacuated by the security forces. According to the applicants, the alleged burning of their houses by the security forces constituted, inter alia, a violation of Article 3 (the prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment or punishment) and Article 8 (the right of respect for private life, family life, and home) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (property rights).

scholarly journals Victim Participation in the Criminal Justice System in the European Union through Private Prosecutions: Issues Emerging from the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 107-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Countries ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

Private prosecutions are one of the ways through which crime victims in many European countries participate in the criminal justice system. However, there seems to be a reluctance at the Council of Europe level to strengthen a victim’s right to institute a private prosecution. In a 1985 Recommendation, the Committee of Ministers stated that ‘[t]he victim should have the right to ask for a review by a competent authority of a decision not to prosecute, or the right to institute private proceeding.’ Later in 2000 in the Recommendation Rec (2000)19 on the role of public prosecution in the criminal justice system, the Committee of Ministers calls upon Member States to ‘authorise’ victims to institute private prosecutions. Directive 2012/29/eu of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 is silent on private prosecutions. The dg Justice Guidance Document related to the transposition and implementation of Directive 2012/29/eu of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 discourages private prosecutions. However, private prosecutions take part in many European countries. It is thus important to highlight some of the issues that have emerged from different European countries on the issue of private prosecutions. Case law from the European Court of Human Rights shows that private prosecutions take place in many European countries. This article, based on case law of the European Court of Human Rights, highlights the following issues with regards to private prosecutions: the right to institute a private prosecution; who may institute a private prosecution? private prosecution after state declines to prosecute; state intervention in a private prosecution; and private prosecution as a domestic remedy which has to be exhausted before a victim of crime approaches the European Court of Human Rights. The author argues that there is a need to recognise the right to private prosecution at the European Union level.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document