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

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.

2012 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Gilles Cuniberti

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.


Author(s):  
Meljana Bregu

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.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Cuciurcă ◽  

Evidence and evidence are of particular importance in criminal proceedings, as, together with evidence, they are closely linked to the realization of the principle of finding out the truth, as well as to the fact that in most criminal cases there are problems related to evidence and means of proof. The legality of the evidence depends on the issuance of a decision to convict or acquit the person in a criminal trial. Legal regulations are closely correlated with the provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, in particular Article 6, the right to a fair trial. In this context, a criterion of applicability of this article in criminal matters lies in the nature of the procedure; the text refers to the right to be tried by a court, in the sense of court, which must decide on the merits of any accusation in this matter criminal law, and the merits of an accusation are based on conclusive, pertinent and useful evidence administered by means of evidence and evidence procedures provided by law.


2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 133-141
Author(s):  
A A Tymoshenko

The article considers the problem of respect for the right to a fair trial at the pre-trial stage of the criminal process. It is pro- posed to take into account the secondary role of pre-trial activity, whose task is to prepare materials for trial. This competitiveness for the prosecution is not allowed. Analysis of the European Court of Human Rights indicates sufficient blurring boundaries that separate statement of the facts of the presence or absence of a violation of Art. 6 of the European Convention «On Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms» (the right to a fair trial). But in any case the decision is motivated by the observance of guarantees of access to justice. Hence, any infringement of the possibi


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 487-502
Author(s):  
Renata Bjelica

The right to an oral public hearing is covered by the right to a fair trial as a right guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as well as by the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. In this sense, the Law on Administrative Disputes prescribes a rule for the court to establish the facts at an oral public hearing. This law prescribes exceptions to the rule, as well as cases in which the court will "always" and in which it is "obliged" to hold an oral public hearing. Analyzing the legal provisions, with reference to the relevant administrative and constitutional caselaw, and considering the present organization and capacity of the administrative judiciary, the author pointed to certain shortcomings of legislative solutions and administrative judicial decisions, and based on the conclusions drawn, tried to offer possible solutions so that, when it comes to holding a hearing before a court, a higher degree of fairness of trial could be achieved.


2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 187
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderek

<p>The purpose of this study is to present and evaluate the main changes to the appeal proceedings model introduced in the last few years to the Polish criminal proceedings in order to accelerate it and, thereby, satisfy the requirements of Article 6 (1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The article presents arguments supporting the thesis whereby these have weakened the right of the defendant to appeal against the judgement. Under the currently applicable regulations, it is permissible that an appellate court may impose a penalty for the first time which cannot be subject to an effective appellate review. Such a solution may raise doubts as to its compliance with Article 14 (5) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The article also formulates a thesis whereby the newly introduced measure – a complaint against the cassatory judgement of the appellate court – contrary to preliminary fears, has not in fact “blown up” the system of appeal measures in the Polish criminal proceedings. At the same time, despite the relatively small scope of its use, it may contribute to strengthening the appeal – as opposed to the revisory – model of appellate proceedings and thus accelerating the criminal proceedings. This thesis is based on the research of all complaints brought to the Supreme Court in 2016–2019.</p>


Author(s):  
Ando Nisuke

This article examines the national interpretation and implementation of the global International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR). It analyses the mechanism of interpretation and implementation and reception of ICCPR and ECHR in the national legal system and considers the national implementation of jurisprudence. This article suggests that the national or domestic implementation of international human rights law or standards reflects �national legal culture� of each state and argues that a multilateral human rights treaty should not be the only forum to analyse the implementation of human rights by national legal system of a state.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (91) ◽  
pp. 23-29
Author(s):  
Jelena Girfanova

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.  


2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (2) ◽  
pp. 443-467
Author(s):  
Hamdija Šarkinović

The paper deals with property, which is guaranteed by Article 58 of the Constitution of Montenegro and Article 1 of Protocol No.1 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The constitutional-law concept of the right to property in Montenegro is broader than the traditional civil law concept, as it includes all real rights, as the European Court under the notion of property, in addition to the usual, includes all acquired rights of a person. The autonomous concept of property and possessions within the meaning of Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms was separately covered, consisting of three rules: principle of peaceful enjoyment of possessions, deprivation of possessions, and control of the use of property. The application of the text of justification of interference with property in the case law of the European Court is explained, which includes the text of legality, the text of a legitimate aim in the general or public interest and the text of proportionality. However, the case law of the ordinary courts in the field of guarantees of property rights, constitutional and convention’s is not harmonized with the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and represents one of the main tasks of the Constitutional Court in the coming period. The Constitutional Court of Montenegro follows the concept of property enshrined in the Constitution and gives the property meaning as the constitutional and convention human right guaranteed by the Constitution, and its inviolability as one of the fundamental values of the constitutional order, although the case law of the Constitutional Court has not fully and always been coherent with the aforementioned principles.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document