scholarly journals INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS STANDARDS AND RUSSIAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 61-66
Author(s):  
A. A. Tarasov

The novelty lies in the author's assessment of the impact of international human rights standards and a fair trial procedure not only on the criminal justice itself, but also on the entire system of relations between the state and the individual, as well as in a critical analysis of clauses found in the literature on possible restrictions on the application of the European Court's practice on human rights in Russia. The aim of the work is to substantiate the unconditionally positive influence of international human rights and justice standards on the Russian criminal justice system and the relationship between the state, the individual and society. The objective is to demonstrate, using examples from the literature and practice of the European Court of Human Rights, the undoubtedly positive impact of the application in Russia of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights on Russian criminal justice and on all practical jurisprudence in Russia. The article uses the methods of system analysis and synthesis, comparative legal and historical methods. As a result, the author's conclusions about the inadmissibility and inappropriateness of limiting the operation on the territory of Russia of international human rights standards and fair trial procedures expressed in the European Convention and court decisions of the European Court have been substantiated. In conclusion, these brief conclusions are formulated.

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 351-368
Author(s):  
Joanna Nicholson

Abstract That an accused receives a fair trial is essential to the legitimacy of international criminal courts and tribunals. However, how best to interpret the right to a fair trial in order to maximize the legitimacy of international criminal courts and tribunals’ decision-making? Some argue that international criminal courts and tribunals should aspire to the highest standards of fairness and should aim to set an example for domestic courts in this regard. Others argue that the unique context within which international criminal courts and tribunals operate allows them, at times, to interpret the right to a fair trial in a way which falls below minimum international human rights standards. This article examines both of these positions and finds both to be problematic. Rather, the article argues that international criminal courts and tribunals should aim for a middle path, the ‘fair enough’ standard, when interpreting the right to a fair trial. In situations where a different standard than that found within international human rights law is applied, international criminal courts and tribunals should expend greater effort in being open and clear as to why this is so, and should take care in communicating this to their audience, including victims and the accused. By doing so, the legitimacy of their decision-making will be enhanced.


2021 ◽  
pp. 68-73
Author(s):  
Ivanna Maryniv ◽  
Liubov Rudai

A problem statement. Human rights law, as a branch of public international law, to date, is mainly codified and consists mainly of treaty rules contained in universal and regional conventions. At the same time, in most cases, the parties to these agreements make reservations of both a substantive and procedural nature that apply to all generations of human rights. The question arises as to the legitimacy of the reservations declared by states to international acts on human rights and freedoms. Аnalysis of research and publications. Many international lawyers deal with the issue of reservations to human rights treaties and their validity. Thus, the works of E.S. Alisievich, are devoted to this issue, I.I. Lukashuk, V.G. Butkevich, V.L. Tolstoy, M.V. Buromensky and others. However, there are a number of problems with the legal regime of reservations to human rights treaties. The main thesis that reveals their essence is that there is no mechanism for effective control over the legitimacy of such reservations. The main text. The article considers the concept of reservations to international treaties, examines the problem of issuing reservations to international human rights treaties. The application of the institution of reservations is studied on the example of certain international treaties in the field of human rights, such as: the European Convention on Human Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the application of reservations to the European Convention on Human Rights is studied. Conclusions. Today, the sovereign right of every state to stipulate international treaties is firmly established in international law, but there is no clear legal regulation of this institution that would prevent abuses by states in this area. We see the need to further study the institution of reservations to human rights treaties, its development and the development of general principles, procedures, and control over their legitimacy.


Author(s):  
Clooney Amal ◽  
Webb Philippa

This chapter examines the right to be tried without undue delay. The speed of a trial is integral to its overall fairness. The longer a trial takes, the longer that the defendant, still presumed innocent, is in legal jeopardy; the longer that they may be kept in pre-trial detention; and the greater the risk that witnesses may forget details or evidence may disappear. However, despite the importance of efficiency in criminal justice, chronic delays in trials in domestic jurisdictions have been widely reported. In fact, the right to be tried without undue delay is one of the most litigated aspects of the right to a fair trial. Unlike some violations, delayed proceedings are relatively easy to prove; the question is what constitutes a delay that is ‘undue’ under international human rights law. There is no global time limit for a criminal proceeding and each case must be assessed on its facts, taking into account its complexity; the conduct of the defendant, the prosecution, and other state authorities; and—for most international bodies—the prejudice caused to the defendant by the delay.


2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 335-355
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi

The right to a fair trial is guaranteed under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In an effort to protect this right, the European Court of Human Rights has, inter alia, set criteria to determine whether or not the admission of a confession in domestic courts violated the right to a fair trial. This jurisprudence also shows that the Court has established two broad guidelines that govern the admissibility of confessions obtained through human rights violations. The first guideline is that confessions obtained in violation of absolute rights and in particular in violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights must be excluded, because their admission will always render the trial unfair. The second guideline is that a confession obtained in violation of a non-absolute right may be admitted without violating the right to a fair trial if the State had a compelling reason or reasons to restrict the right in question. The Court has also dealt with the issue of the admissibility of real evidence obtained through human rights violations. The purpose of this article is to highlight the Court’s jurisprudence.


2014 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-558
Author(s):  
Alexandra Maria Rodrigues Araújo

The Court of Justice in Y and Z deals with persecution in the form of interference in the right to practise one’s religion. The main aspects of the judgment can be summarized in the following three statements: in order to be granted refugee status under eu law, only a severe violation of religious freedom can be regarded as an act of persecution; the severity of the acts of persecution must be identified on the basis of the nature of the repression inflicted on the individual and its consequences; the competent authorities cannot expect the applicant to abstain from religious practices upon the return to his country of origin. Y and Z is an undeniable reference towards the interpretation of religion-based persecution provisions of the Qualification Directive. From the perspective of religious freedom, the Court reinforces the commitment of the eu with the European and international human rights standards concerning this right.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 161-176
Author(s):  
Vitalii Oleksandrovych Serohin ◽  
Svitlana Hryhorivna Serohina ◽  
Liliya Mykolayivna Gryshko ◽  
Kateryna Petrivna Danicheva

Everything about human right is inalienable void of violation from the human race. It is therefore that responsibility of the international community in ensuring the effective preservation and respect of these rights without any threat of violations. In ensuring its recognition and implementation, international standards have been established where there is the need of States parties to these international human right treaties in ensuring its incorporation in its various domestic legislations. The content and specific features of the introduction of international human rights standards into national legislation have been analyzed in the article. The methodological basis of research is a set of general scientific and special methods, in particular, dialectical, historical-legal, epistemological, comparative-legal. International standards for the protection of human rights have been defined as principles and norms enshrined in international regulatory legal acts that define fundamental human rights and freedoms, the obligation of the State to respect them, to assist in their realization, preservation and protection against unlawful encroachments, and to establish liability for their violations and methods of protection. It has been clarified that the procedure of implementation of international human rights standards into national legislation includes the following stages: (i) recognition of human rights by the State and their enshrinement in national legislation; (ii) institutionalization of the standard of human rights protection; (iii) bringing the current legislation in line with the international human rights standard and interpreting the latter; (iv) establishment of measures and means of protection and defense of human rights; (v) determining the procedure for the realization of the enshrined right; (vi) control over the observance of the international human rights standard.


2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Hannah Sorenson

You have the opportunity to decide whether or not a person gets caned, the only caveat is that they have committed a crime against you. What will you do? This essay explores the moral complexity of caning in Singapore through an exploration of corporal punishment, criminal justice, moral philosophy, and the Asian values debate; a dilemma that ultimately places concerns of society and the individual at odds. In doing so, the essay argues that the morality of caning changes on the basis of the ethical framework and modification of situation variables. Even so, the moral complexity of caning is not superficially evident. In order to thoroughly engage with all elements of this complexity, this essay begins by attempting to decipher the place of punishment within international human rights frameworks. From there, the essay explores the morality of punishment and its employ in colonial endeavors. This leads to a discussion of modernization, humanitarian ideologies, and control. By creating a framework for analyzing criminal justice in Singapore—including an outline of the intersections of criminal justice, development, and prosperity —this essay seeks to explore the balance between corporal punishment as a tool of prosperity and corporal punishment as a source of pain and degradation. When placed in consequentialist and virtue-based ethical frameworks caning in Singapore looks very different, forcing the moral actor to weigh societal concerns with concerns for individual pain, suffering, and liberties. Keywords: Caning, Morality, Society, Punishment.


Author(s):  
Astrid Kjeldgaard-Pedersen

Following a summary presentation of some key events in the history of international human rights law before the Second World War, Chapter 7 concentrates on one prominent example within the field of international human rights law, namely the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Section 7.2 deals in turn with three core issues. First, Section 7.2.1 describes the evolution of the procedural status of individuals before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and assesses the role of the concept of international legal personality in that regard. Section 7.2.2 studies the Court’s practice concerning the interpretation of the ECHR, including the margin of appreciation doctrine. Finally, Section 7.2.3 analyses the practice of the ECtHR as regards the place of the Convention in the international legal system.


2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-103
Author(s):  
Ciara Smyth

The principle of the best interests of the child is regularly referred to by the European Court of Human Rights in its jurisprudence involving children. However, the principle is notoriously problematic, and nowhere more so than in the immigration context where the state’s sovereign interests are keenly at stake. This article critically examines the expulsion and first-entry jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, interrogating whether a ‘principled’ approach is adopted to the best interests principle. It is argued that a principled approach is one which sees the best interests principle interpreted in the light of its parent document, the un Convention on the Rights of the Child, as interpreted by the un Committee on the Rights of the Child. It is demonstrated that despite widespread recourse to the best interests principle, the European Court of Human Rights fails to adopt a rights-based approach when identifying the best interests of the child and does not always give sufficient weight to the best interests of the child when balancing the interests of the state against those of the individual. The analysis also reveals a way for the Court to develop a more principled approach to the best interests principle.


2006 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 611-632 ◽  
Author(s):  
ERIKA DE WET

This article explores the composition of the emerging international value system, including its hierarchical components. It also contrasts this fragile international value system with the more strongly developed European value system (European public order), as concretized by the European Convention on Human Rights and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. It first argues that international human rights norms constitute the ‘core content’ of a constantly evolving and layered international value system. Within this value system, a special but fragile hierarchical status is granted to those human rights norms that qualify as jus cogens and/or erga omnes norms. Thereafter it explores the manner in which the European Court of Human Rights has concretized the normative superiority of obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights for member states vis-à-vis other norms of public international law, to the extent that a conflict between these norms arises. It concludes by examining whether these developments could also strengthen the international value system through a spill-over effect via the work of international human rights bodies and national courts. This, in turn, would strengthen the ability of the international value system to determine the outcome of conflicts between international obligations stemming from different international regimes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document