scholarly journals THE PROHIBITION OF TORTURE, CRUEL OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT IN CLOSED INSTITUTIONS

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (91) ◽  
pp. 23-29
Author(s):  
Jelena Girfanova
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
European Regional

In the paper “The prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment in closed Institutions” the author has examined the obxervasnce of  persons’  in detention,  custody or imprisonment human rights in the European regional acts and national instruments as well as the provision of health care for detainees and convicted persons alike.All basic human rights’ documents, namely: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the United Nations and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms state that “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, degrading his or her human dignity”.  All persons who have been punished, regardless of the crimes for which they were convicted, have the right to humane treatment and respect for their personality. No actions of people, whatever they may be, justify the inhuman treatment of them or the humiliation of their personality.  

scholarly journals Citizenship Deprivation under the European Convention-System: A Case Study of Belgium

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-282
Author(s):  
Louise Reyntjens
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
System A ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Foreign Fighters

In response to Islamic-inspired terrorism and the growing trend of foreign fighters, European governments are increasingly relying on citizenship deprivation as a security tool. This paper will focus on the question of how the fundamental rights of individuals deprived of their citizenship are affected and which protection is offered for them by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (‘ECHR’). In many countries, these new and broader deprivation powers were left unaccompanied by stronger (procedural) safeguards that protect the human rights they might affect. Unlike the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the ECHR does not provide for an explicit right to citizenship. The question therefore rises what protection, if any, is offered by the ECHRsystem against citizenship deprivation and for the right to citizenship. Through a case study of the Belgian measure of citizenship deprivation, the (implicit) protection provided by the Convention-system is demonstrated.

scholarly journals On the Issue of Inadmissibility of Infringing the Right to a Fair Trial of Criminal Cases under the Guise of Protecting State Sovereignty

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 176-182
Author(s):  
A A Timoshenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

The author examines the issue of the prospects for the direct application of human rights standards in the regulation of criminal procedural activity. In this regard, the key attention is paid to the provisions of art. 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as art. 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the right to a fair trial of criminal cases. It is assumed that only a fair and impartial court is able to ensure the progressive development of society, its stability and security of citizens. Based on the analysis of the main possible ways of further development of the criminal procedural legislation, one of which is related to the increase of formal requirements for criminal procedural activity, and the other - with increased attention to the natural-legal principles of the application of the law, preference is given to the second approach. Based on the analysis of the monuments of world jurisprudence, the study of the history of the formation of international human rights law, it is concluded that it is impossible to overcome the progressive movement towards the triumph of the humanitarian status of the person recognized by the international community. In this regard, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, assessing the correctness of the European Court of Human Rights interpretation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, should be guided by world standards. In addition, there is a need for widespread respect for the need to respect the right to a fair trial.

The taking of hostages and international humanitarian law

1989 ◽  
Vol 29 (270) ◽  
pp. 196-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hernán Salinas Burgos
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
United Nations General ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
United Nations General Assembly ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

It is generally acknowledged by the international community that the taking of hostages is one of the most vile and reprehensible of acts. This crime violates fundamental individual rights—the right to life, to liberty and to security—that are protected by binding legal instruments such as the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights on the worldwide level, and the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights and the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms on the regional level. The United Nations General Assembly has stated that the taking of hostages is an act which places innocent human lives in danger and violates human dignity.

Constituting Humanity: Democracy, Human Rights, and Political Community

2005 ◽  
Vol 31 ◽  
pp. 227-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Bohman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Affairs ◽  
Political Community ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Strongly Connected ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

Democracy and human rights have long been strongly connected in international covenants. In documents such as 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the 1966 International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, democracy is justified both intrinsically in terms of popular sovereignty and instrumentally as the best way to “foster the full realization of all human rights.” Yet, even though they are human and thus universal rights, political rights are often surprisingly specific. In the Covenant, for example, “the right to take part in the conduct of public affairs” is equated with “the right to vote and to be elected.” More often then not, their realization is left to states and their constitutions, as for example in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. Political rights have a “peculiar” status among enumerated human rights, and this difficulty has to do with deep assumptions about the nature and scope of democracy and political community that remain unexamined by the drafters of these important declarations.

scholarly journals NE BIS IN IDEM PRINCIPLE IN THE CRIMINAL LEGISLATION OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA AND COURTS’ JURISPRUDENCE

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 1439-1444
Author(s):  
Miodrag N. Simović ◽  
Marina M. Simović ◽  
Vladimir M. Simović
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
Ne Bis In Idem ◽  
International Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

The paper is dedicated to ne bis in idem principle, which is a fundamental human right safeguarded by Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This principle is sometimes also referred to as double jeopardy.The principle implies that no one shall be liable to be tried or punished again in criminal proceedings under the jurisdiction of the same State for an offence for which s/he has already been finally convicted or acquitted (internal ne bis in idem principle), and that in some other State or before the International Court (ne bis in idem principle in respect of the relations between the states or the State and the International Court) the procedure may not be conducted if the person has already been sentenced or acquitted. The identity of the indictable act (idem), the other component of this principle, is more complex and more difficult to be determined than the first one (ne bis).The objective of this principle is to secure the legal certainty of citizens who must be liberated of uncertainty or fear that they would be tried again for the same criminal offence that has already been decided by a final and binding decision. This principle is specific for the accusative and modern system of criminal procedure but not for the investigative criminal procedure, where the possibility for the bindingly finalised criminal procedure to be repeated on the basis of same evidence and regarding the same criminal issue existed. In its legal nature, a circumstance that the proceedings are pending on the same criminal offence against the same accused, represents a negative procedural presumption and, therefore, an obstacle for the further course of proceedings, i.e. it represents the procedural obstacle which prevents an initiation of new criminal procedure for the same criminal case in which the final and binding condemning or acquitting judgement has been passed (exceptio rei iudicatae).The right not to be liable to be tried or punished again for an offence for which s/he has already been finally convicted or acquitted is provided for, primarily, by the International Documents (Article 14, paragraph 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms). The International framework has also been given to ne bis in idem principle through three Conventions adopted by the Council of Europe and those are the European Convention on Extradition and Additional Protocols thereto, the European Convention on the Transfer of Proceedings in Criminal Matters, and the European Convention on the International Validity of Criminal Judgments.Ne bis in idem principle is traditionally associated with the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Likewise, no derogation from Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 shall be made under Article 15 of the Convention at the time of war or other state of emergency which is threatening the survival of the nation (Article 4, paragraph 3 of Protocol No. 7). Thereby it is categorised as the irrevocable conventional right together with the right to life, prohibition of torture, prohibition of slavery, and the legality principle. Similarly, ne bis in idem principle does not apply in the case of the renewed trials by the International criminal courts where the first trial was conducted in some State, while the principle is applicable in the reversed situation. The International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia could have conducted a trial even if a person had already been adjudicated in some State, in the cases provided for by its Statute and in the interest of justice.

Does Self-isolation Violate the Right to Liberty? An Analysis of the European Court of Human Rights’ Practice in Light of the Ukrainian Experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 368-385
Author(s):  
Yana Litins’ka ◽  
Oleksandra Karpenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Stress Test ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Human Rights Practice ◽  
Rapid Action ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

Abstract COVID-19 became a stress-test for many legal systems because it required that a balance be found between rapid action to prevent the spread of the disease, and continued respect for human rights. Many states in Europe, including Ukraine, chose to enforce an obligation to self-isolate. In this article we review what the obligation to self-isolate entails in the case of Ukraine. We also analyse whether such an obligation should be viewed as a deprivation or a mere restriction of liberty, and if it is permissible under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Monetary remedies for breach of confidence in privacy cases

Legal Studies ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 430-464 ◽  
Author(s):  
Normann Witzleb
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Private Information ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Property Law ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
House Of Lords ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Privacy Breaches ◽  
The Right

In Campbell v MGN Ltd, the House of Lords endorsed an expansive interpretation of the breach of confidence action to protect privacy interests. The scope and content of this transformed cause of action have already been subject to considerable judicial consideration and academic discussion. This paper focuses on the remedial consequences of privacy breaches. It undertakes an analysis of the principles which govern awards for pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss, the availability of gain-based relief, in particular an account of profits, and exemplary damages.Even in its traditional scope, the monetary remedies for breach of confidence raise complex issues, mainly resulting from the fact that this doctrine draws on multiple jurisdictional sources such as equity, contract and property law. The difficulties of determining the appropriate remedial principles are now compounded by the fact that English law also aims to integrate its obligation to protect the right to privacy under Art 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 into the conceptual framework of the breach of confidence action.The analysis provided in this paper supports the contention that not only the scope of the cause of action but also important remedial issues are likely to remain in doubt until the wrong of ‘misuse of private information’ is freed from the constraints of the traditional action for breach of confidence. A separate tort would be able to deal more coherently and comprehensively with all wrongs commonly regarded as privacy breaches.

The European Court of Human Rights: Sabeh El Leil v. France

2012 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Gilles Cuniberti
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Sovereign Immunity ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Wrongful Dismissal

In Sabeh el Leil v. France, the European Court of Human Rights (‘‘ECtHR’’ or ‘‘the Court’’) ruled for the second time that a contracting state had violated the right to a fair trial afforded by Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (‘‘Convention’’) by denying access to its courts to an embassy employee suing for wrongful dismissal on the grounds that the employer enjoyed sovereign immunity. The ECtHR had first ruled so a year earlier in Cudak v. Lithuania, where the plaintiff was also an embassy employee.

scholarly journals The Protection of Human Rights in Post-Communist Albania

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 63
Author(s):  
Meljana Bregu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Communist Regime ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Revolutionary Movement ◽  
The Past ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

Albania was one of the most isolated countries in Europe for nearly 45 years. During the communist era, the legal system was under the direct control of the Party of Labor. The protection of human rights in the first years of the communist regime was clearly shaped on the soviet principles. The criminal code of Albania was the symbol of a repressive system, regardless of human rights protection, crimes punishable by death were sanctioned by various articles, including “agitation and propaganda against the state” and ‘activities against the revolutionary movement of the working class”. Hoxha also closed the Ministry of Justice and banned the private practice of law as a consequence the right to a fair trial was denied. After the fall of communism Albania has made significant progress toward respect for civil and political rights, especially toward the right to a fair trial. The constitution of 1998 protects the right to a fair trial in chapter two and one important step is the ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights in 1996, which guarantee the right to a fair trial in article six. Still, 25 years of transformation are not enough to wipe away the legacy of the past; the lack of human rights mechanisms poses a serious challenge to the Albanian democratic system. Still today Albania faces important issues concerning the protection of human rights generally and particularly the right to a fair trial. This fact is evident if we refer to the cases of the European Court of human rights versus Albania dealing with the application of article 6 of the Convention.The paper aims to address the protection of human rights after the demise of the communist regime, especially regarding the right to a fair trail, analyzing the progress but also the continuity in some aspects with the past.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document