scholarly journals Problems of the Russian Legislstion Improvement and Practice of its Applicatoin Based on the Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (in the Spfere of the Administrative Coersion)

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 30-39
Author(s):  
Viatcheslav Viatcheslavovich Gavrilov ◽  
◽  
Olga Eugenievna Shishkina ◽  

The article is devoted to the issues of the implementation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights into the Russian legal system. The sphere of administrative coercion and administrative liability was chosen as a practical material for this research. The authors stress the role and importance of the ECHR practice for the improvement of Russian legislation, outline problems and difficulties of the implementation of the ECHR judgments in this sphere.

2021 ◽  
pp. 23-29
Author(s):  
Dmytro Boichuk ◽  
Kateryna Torhashova

The article focuses on the importance of the European Union's values in the development of the legal system of the member states of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and for the functioning of the European Union, further integration processes and their reflection in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The ideological interpretation and practical implementation of these decisions are reflected.


Author(s):  
E.S. Kalyuzhna

Ukraine has recognized the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights by acceding to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The implementation of Western concepts of the rule of law, human dignity and human rights stipulates study of the European Court of Human Rights practice, which, in accordance with national law, is the source of Ukrainian law. It is emphasized that the enshrinement of the rule of law principle in a number of laws was accompanied by a normative provision on the necessity to understand the content of this principle through the European Court of Human Rights practice. The purpose of the study is to elucidate the general provisions characterizing the impact of the European Court of Human Rightsice practice on the national system of Ukraine. It is substantiated that the European Court of Human Rights ensures the relevance of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms provisions, compliance of its rules with modernity, ensuring the general spirit of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms which is designed to uphold and ensure the values of a democratic society. It is noted that in interpreting the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the European Court of Human Rights is a kind of subject of legal doctrines making in the field of human rights affecting the legal systems of the states parties to this Convention. Some decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in cases against Ukraine, which played a significant role in changing the national legal system, are analyzed, in particular,the decisions in the cases Koretsky and Others v. Ukraine, Natalia Mykhaylenko v. Ukraine, and Volokhy v. Ukraine. The following legal provisions as the separation of law and the law are mentioned, giving priority to law over the law  in case of contradiction between them; understanding the content of the rule of law, the importance of legal certainty and reasoning of the decision to restrict human rights, legal equality of people, and giving real access to a fair trial to a person, etc. It is concluded that when considering the applicants' complaints about Ukraine's non-fulfillment of its obligations in the field of human rights, the European Court of Human Rights forms legal provisions that become an integral part of the domestic legal system, in some cases they (the decisions) are the factor in changing legislation, and influence the legal doctrine transformation.


Author(s):  
Vladimir Jilkine

The article deals with the basis and procedure for review of court decisions that have entered into force, after the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights on violations of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in review of the cases by the Supreme Court of Finland, in connection with the decision by which the applicant appealed to The European Court of Human Rights. The author’s analysis and comparison of judicial practice and the European legal system shows that when making decisions, the Supreme Court applies current national constitutional and legislative provisions.


2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori G. Beaman

Moreover, with the benefit of hindsight, it is easy to identify in the constant central core of Christian faith, despite the inquisition, despite anti-Semitism and despite the crusades, the principles of human dignity, tolerance and freedom, including religious freedom, and therefore, in the last analysis, the foundations of the secular State.A European court should not be called upon to bankrupt centuries of European tradition. No court, certainly not this Court, should rob the Italians of part of their cultural personality.In March, 2011, after five years of working its way through various levels of national and European courts, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights decided that a crucifix hanging at the front of a classroom did not violate the right to religious freedom under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Specifically, Ms. Soile Lautsi had complained that the presence of the crucifix violated her and her children's right to religious freedom and that its presence amounted to an enforced religious regime. The Grand Chamber, reversing the lower Chamber's decision, held that while admittedly a religious symbol, the crucifix also represented the cultural heritage of Italians.


2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samo Bardutzky

On 22 December 2009, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (hereafter: the Court) issued a judgment on the applications filed by two citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mr Dervo Sejdić and Mr Jakob Finci. It found a violation of their rights under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and under the Protocols to the Convention. Bosnia and Herzegovina had violated the applicants' rights under Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 3 of Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and under Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.


2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 241-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabrijela Mihelčić ◽  
Maša Marochini Zrinski

The authors analyse the national protection from emissions, in the first place, a property law component of this regime. Domestic regulation of the protection of property rights from harassment was brought in the perspective of the protection that the European Court of Human Rights provides for the right to live in a healthy environment, primarily through the protection of rights under Art. 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (right to respect for private and family life and home). In the context of the latter, the authors have analysed the interpretative methods used by the European Court and explored the following features: the requirement that environmental and environmental impacts and disturbances violate the Convention right, that is, the existence of a specific Convention causal link; the category of minimum level of severity; oscillation of the "quantum" of minimum level of severity within conventional "fluctuations"; and the scope (and type) of protecting the right to live in a healthy environment through the paradigm of the positive / negative obligations of the Contracting States.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 368-385
Author(s):  
Yana Litins’ka ◽  
Oleksandra Karpenko

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document