Human rights restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland and Russia. Legal and comparative aspects

2021 ◽  
Vol 2(24) ◽  
pp. 323-340
Author(s):  
Marta Pietras-Eichberger
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Safety And Health ◽  
Research Problems ◽  
The Impact

The study analyzed selected issues related to the scope of human rights and freedoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in Poland and Russia. The author wanted to compare the regulations issued by a Member State of the European Union and a country outside the European Union, often using undemocratic methods of exercising power. The work focuses on research problems related to the principles of protection, the confrontation of individual interests with the public interest, and the impact of the regimes introduced during the COVID-19 pandemic on human rights law in both countries. The thesis of the study is that in the event of a threat to public health, analogous restrictions on human rights are introduced both in an undemocratic country and in a country belonging to international structures identifying with democratic values. The state of the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed, and in some area even contributed to the creation of mechanisms reserved for crisis situations, posing a direct and real threat to public safety and health.

scholarly journals The Principle of Sustainable Development as the Basis for Weighing the Public Interest and Individual Interest in the Scope of the Cultural Heritage Protection Law in the European Union

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (7) ◽  
pp. 3985
Author(s):  
Adam Kozień
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Individual Interest ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Environmental Aspect ◽  
The Public

The concept of sustainable development is widely used, especially in social, environmental and economic aspects. The principle of sustainable development was derived from the concept of sustainable development, which appears in legal terms at the international, EU, national and local levels. Today, the value of cultural heritage that should be legally protected is indicated. A problematic issue may be the clash in this respect of the public interest related to the protection of heritage with the individual interest, expressed, e.g., in the ownership of cultural heritage designates. During the research, scientific methods that are used in legal sciences were used: theoretical–legal, formal–dogmatic, historical–legal methods, as well as the method of criticism of the literature, and legal inferences were also used. The analyses were carried out on the basis of the interdisciplinary literature on the subject, as well as international, EU and national legal acts—sources of the generally applicable law. Research has shown that the interdisciplinary principle of sustainable development, especially from the perspective of the social and auxiliary environmental aspect, may be the basis for weighing public and individual interests in the area of legal protection of cultural heritage in the European Union. It was also indicated that it is possible in the situation of treating the principle of sustainable development in terms of Dworkin’s “policies” and allows its application not only at the level of European Union law (primary and secondary), but also at the national legal orders of the European Union Member States.

Fixing, Adjusting, Regulating, Protecting Human Rights - The Shifting Uses of Regularisations in the European Union

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Albert Kraler
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Irregular Migrants ◽  
National Human ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Human Rights Based Approach ◽  
The Eu

AbstractAlmost all Member States in the European Union currently make use, or in the past have made use of some form of regularisation of irregular immigrants, although to greatly varying degrees, in different ways and as a rule only reluctantly. A distinct feature of recent regularisations has been the shift towards a humanitarian justification of regularisation measures. In this context, regularisation has become reframed as an issue of the protection of irregular migrants’ human rights. As a result, regularisation has to some extent also been turned from a political tool in managing migration into an issue of international, European and national human rights law. While a human rights framework indeed offers a powerful rationale and at times compelling reasons why states ought to afford a legal status to irregular migrants, I argue that a human rights based approach must always be complemented by pragmatic considerations, as a human rights based justification of regularisation alone will be insufficient to find adequate responses to the changing presence of irregular migrants in the EU, not all of which can invoke human rights based claims to residence.

Six Dimensions of Public Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 399-430
Author(s):  
Paul Craig
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Public Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
The Public ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Six Dimensions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The Way

This chapter draws on the six dimensions of public law covered in the book: theory, institutions and accountability, constitutions and rights, process and procedure, legislation, and case law. It links discussion of these dimensions, by considering how they have been affected by Brexit. The chapter is not concerned with the contending arguments for leaving or remaining in the European Union. The focus is on the way in which Brexit has ‘pressure-tested’ the public law regime in the United Kingdom and the European Union. The six dimensions of public law that are discussed in the preceding chapters form the architectural frame through which the impact of Brexit on the public law regimes is assessed in both the United Kingdom and the European Union.

2. Copyright

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Press
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Copyright Law ◽  
Substantial Part ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Dramatic Works ◽  
Sound Recordings ◽  
Fair Dealing ◽  
The Public ◽  
Musical Works

This chapter defines copyright as arising whenever a work is created under qualifying conditions. The Copyright, Designs, and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA) defines eight types of work that fall under two categories: works that must be original or ‘authorial works’, including literary works, dramatic works, musical works, and artistic works; and works that need not be original or ‘entrepreneurial works’: films, sound recordings, broadcasts, and the typographical arrangement of published editions. Copyright is infringed by copying or communicating the whole or a substantial part of a work—referred to as primary infringement—or by dealing in infringing copies of a work-referred to as secondary infringement. There are some major and many minor defences to copyright infringement including the ‘fair dealing’ defences and the public interest. Many aspects of copyright law have been harmonized by the European Union.

BETWEEN EXCLUSION AND FAMILIARITY: AN ETHNOGRAPHY OF THE MEDITERRANEAN MISSING PROJECT1

2018 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 28-31
Author(s):  
Giorgia Mirto
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Data Collection ◽  
The State ◽  
Post Mortem ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
The Mediterranean ◽  
Ethnographic Analysis ◽  
Future Work

Abstract For decades, migrants have continued to die or go missing in the Mediterranean, while the European Union and Italy continue to exhibit a policy vacuum around the issue of the missing, despite the duties on states imposed by human rights law. The investigation of deaths is inadequate, the Italian judicial authorities demonstrate disinterest to proceed with investigations in the identification of deceased migrants, and the inefficient post-mortem data collection seriously compromise every effort to restore names and dignity to the dead. This attitude seems to confirm the theory of “necropolitics,” which views the state as a racist and excluding sovereign entity. But ethnographic analysis of the work of some of the involved actors reveals recognition of the deceased and missing migrants based on a sense of familiarity and closeness. Here, the experience of the Mediterranean Missing Project is discussed, with an emphasis on future work prospects for both academia and practitioners.

scholarly journals The United Kingdom’s Coronavirus Act, deprivations of liberty, and the right to liberty and security of the person

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Pugh
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Article 5

Abstract In response to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic the UK government has passed the Coronavirus Act 2020 (CA). Among other things, this act extends existing statutory powers to impose restrictions of liberty for public health purposes. The extension of such powers naturally raises concerns about whether their use will be compatible with human rights law. In particular, it is unclear whether their use will fall within the public heath exception to the Article 5 right to liberty and security of the person in the European Convention of Human Rights. In this paper, I outline key features of the CA, and briefly consider how the European Court of Human Rights has interpreted the public health exception to Article 5 rights. This analysis suggests two grounds on which restrictions of liberty enforced some under the CA might be vulnerable to claims of Article 5 rights violations. First, the absence of specified time limits on certain restrictions of liberty means that they may fail the requirement of legal certainty championed by the European Court in its interpretation of the public health exception. Second, the Coronavirus Act’s extension of powers to individuals lacking public health expertise may undermine the extent to which the act will ensure that deprivations of liberty are necessary and proportionate.

Foreigners: Wanted Dead or Alive?

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 409-441
Author(s):  
Céline Bauloz
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Premature Death ◽  
Integrated Approach ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The One ◽  
Seriously Ill

While non-refoulement is an absolute principle of international human rights law, its application to seriously ill individuals exposed to premature death and physical and mental suffering because of the substandard medical system in their country of origin seems to have followed a double standard in Europe. On the one hand, medical cases are increasingly treated at the margin of the non-refoulement principle by the European Court of Human Rights, being only covered in highly exceptional cases. On the other hand, seriously ill individuals have been excluded from the scope of subsidiary protection in the European Union as confirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. Against such restrictive interpretations, the present article calls for an integrated approach where all non-refoulement claims, including those on medical grounds, are to be assessed along the same criteria so as to ensure seriously ill individuals a genuine right to live in dignity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document