scholarly journals Compulsory Vaccinations against Covid-19 versus the Right to Respect for Private Life

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Miaskowska-Daszkiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Marketing Authorisation ◽  
Herd Immunity ◽  
Current Approach ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Acceptable Solution ◽  
Compulsory Vaccination ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Sensitive Issue ◽  
The Right

The development and marketing authorisation of COVID-19 vaccines has given the authorities a much-anticipated instrument to fight a pandemic. At the same time, however, for the extinction of the epidemic to become real, according to epidemiologists' estimates, the threshold of herd immunity must reach the value of 50-70 percent. To ensure mass vaccination, it should be considered whether a compulsory vaccination against COVID-19 would be an acceptable solution. It is a sensitive issue in the context of the right to self-determination, guaranteed both in Article 8 European Convention on Human Rights, as well as most modern constitutions. The aim of this paper is to investigate whether the compulsory vaccination against COVID-19 could be the next step in the fight against the pandemic. In particular, whether the current approach of the ECHR and national courts to compulsory vaccination can be considered adequate in relation to COVID-19 vaccines with a conditional marketing authorisation.

scholarly journals MARRIAGE AND FAMILY LIFE IN THE JURISPRUDENCE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 58-63
Author(s):  
Oana Ghiţă
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Marriage And Family ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The article 8 and 12 – European Convention of Human Rights regulate the right to family and private life and, respectively, the right to marriage. These rights have been transposed into the national legislation of the States-members of European Union. The two rights that we are speaking of, which can be found as a constitutional principle and as an ordinary law, tries to reduce the public authorities interference into the private and personal family field. The reality proves that the right to marriage has been broken by the impossibility of the spouses to marry because they can not be divorced. This is the reason why we have two different rights in European Convention: the right to private, family life and the right to marriage. Many European states still have a limited regulation of the reasons for getting the dissolution of marriage. The European Convention has nothing to do with such cases because does not regulates the right to divorce and it would be an interference into the national law. How can a person be married again if he/she doesn’t have the possibility to divorce? In these conditions, can we take the European Convention into consideration as a real instrument of protection for the right to marriage? The first precedent of ECHR jurisprudences limits the infringement of the right to marriage made by the national Courts because of the lack of regulations or a bad interpretation of it.

Freedom of expression and respect for private life in the context of the development of new information technologies: judicial practice of the ECHR and national courts

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 141-156
Author(s):  
Iliya Shablinsky
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Partial Control ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Judicial Practice ◽  
New Information

This article examines and summarises judicial practice in cases related to the use of new information technologies. The study primarily focuses upon the decisions of Russian courts (general jurisdiction and arbitration) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Employing ECHR practice, the author also refers to numerous decisions by courts in Hungary and the United Kingdom. Cases related to the use of new information technologies can be distinguished between, and this article examines the judicial practice of three categories of cases: 1) blocking of internet resources; 2) employers’ control over employees’ electronic correspondence; 3) journalists’ use of hyperlinks in author’s texts and their responsibility of such placements. Within each category of cases, the rights of citizens can be seriously violated. The article highlights that in an era of rapid development of new information technologies, states, represented by special services and authorised state bodies, are making unprecedented efforts to ensure that they maintain at least partial control over the activities of new actors (bloggers, Internet media, Internet platforms, etc.). Similarly, courts often compromise with authorities when resolving such issues. Notably, national Russian courts did not consider parties’ interests, nor did they assess the need to block all sites with a particular IP address. They did not even follow the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation’s decision to apply the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights within the framework of the ECHR. The courts limited themselves to pointing out that Roskomnadzor acted within its power. Thus, the decisions of the national courts did not offer a mechanism for protecting rights. Within the norms regulating the new sphere of relations, there are often norms of a restrictive and prohibitive nature, and these norms are dominant in the Russian Federation. In this regard, there remains grounds for concern among lawyers involved in the protection of rights related to new information technologies.

CONCEALED BIRTHS, ADOPTION AND HUMAN RIGHTS LAW: BEING WARY OF SEEKING TO OPEN WINDOWS INTO PEOPLE'S SOULS

2012 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 325-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Marshall
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Personal Autonomy ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Biological Father ◽  
Legal Decisions ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Biological Family ◽  
The Right ◽  
Confidentiality And Privacy

AbstractAlthough rare, giving birth in secret or in concealed circumstances still happens in the United Kingdom. The new born child's existence is unknown to his or her biological ‘father’ and or to the wider biological family of the birth giver who wishes to place the child for adoption without his or her existence being revealed to them. Legal decisions need to be made judicially when a local authority seeks orders as to whether it is required to make further inquiries to identify and notify the biological father and or wider biological family as to any forthcoming adoption proceedings. Developments in European human rights law's protection of a right to respect one's private life provided by Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) towards a right to personal autonomy, identity and integrity can be interpreted in different ways. However, three positions are argued here to guard against an erosion of women's confidentiality and privacy in these circumstances. First, women's choices of concealment should be accepted with respect rather than perceived as inauthentic and therefore impermissible; this is in keeping with Article 2's right to life and Article 8's right to personal autonomy and integrity. Second, the right to family life protected by Article 8 of any wider biological family and father is not contravened by allowing women to give birth discreetly. Third, openness and transparency, when it comes to exact knowledge of one's parents in this context is not necessary for a child's identity rights, which are also protected by Article 8's right to personal identity, to be legally protected.

The European Court of Human Rights has the Turkish Security Forces Held Responsible for Violations of Human Rights: The Case of Akdivar and Others

1997 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Zwaak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Violent Conflict ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Eastern Region ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Security Forces ◽  
South Eastern ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

In this article, special attention will be given to the recent judgment of the European Court of Human Right in the case of Akdivar and Others v. Turkey. Since 1985, a violent conflict has raged in the South-Eastern region of Turkey, between the Turkish security forces and sections of the Kurdish population in favour of Kurdish autonomy, in particular members of the PKK (Workers' Party of Kurdistan). Since 1987, 10 of the 11 provinces of South-Eastern Turkey have been subjected to emergency rule, which was in force at the time of the facts complained of. The main issue in this case concerned the fact that during this conflict, a large number of villages have been destroyed and evacuated by the security forces. According to the applicants, the alleged burning of their houses by the security forces constituted, inter alia, a violation of Article 3 (the prohibition of torture and inhuman treatment or punishment) and Article 8 (the right of respect for private life, family life, and home) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 (property rights).

scholarly journals BRIEF CONSIDERATOINS REGARDING THE JURIDICAL PROTECTION OF PRIVATE LIFE IN THE REGULATION OF THE NEW ROMANIAN CIVIL CODE

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-71
Author(s):  
Georgeta Valeria Georgeta Valeria
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Civil Code ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Personal Privacy ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Private Lives ◽  
The Right

This article, entitled Brief Considerations Regarding the Juridical Protection of PrivateLife in the Regulation of the New Romanian civil Code, examines the new legal regime of howthe private life of the person is respected, in connection to the inseparable link between the rightto a private life, lato sensu, and its four intrinsic rights – the right to freedom of speech, the rightof the person to dignity, the right to a private life and image rights.The regulation was imperatively necessary, both to complete the framework of the valuesguaranteed by art. 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, but also to establish aninterference between the concept of private life and personal privacy, in the context of theexcessive broadcasting of peoples’ private lives.

scholarly journals Internet and freedom of expression in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 1023-1042
Author(s):  
Ljiljana Mijović
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Internet ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
And Control

Internet as a means of communication, whatever the type of information it might be used for, falls within the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. As established in the European Court's case law, freedom of expression constitutes one of the essentials of a democratic society, therefore limitations on that freedom foreseen in Article 10 § 2 of the Convention are to be interpreted strictly. In order to ensure effective protection of one's freedom of expression on the Internet, States bear a positive obligation to create an appropriate regulatory framework, balancing the right to freedom of expression on one and the limitations prescribed in Article 10 § 2, on the other hand. Special attention in doing so is to be paid to the risk of harm posed by content and communications on the Internet to the exercise and enjoyment of other human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the European Convention, particularly the right to respect for private life. While it is the fact that the electronic network, serving billions of users worldwide, will never be subject to the same regulations and control, because of the national authorities' margin of appreciation, the European Court established commonly applicable general principles regarding the Internet as a media of exercising right to freedom of expression.

Ensure the Inviolability of Personal Life in the Conduct of Police Preventive Activities

Law and World ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 51-59
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
Private Life ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
National Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
Principle Of Proportionality ◽  
The Right

The paper addresses the basic rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution of Georgia, in particular, issues related to personal data. The development of information technology has had a significant impact on the dangers of illegal processing of personal data. The European Court of Human Rights considers the inviolability of private life as a precondition for human autonomy, independent development and protection of human dignity. According to the norms of international law, the right to respect for private life is recognized as one of the most important and fundamental rights, the protection of which is indicated by the legislation of Georgia. The aim of the paper is to analyze the legislation and practice of police law in the field of protection of the right to privacy and to offer relevant recommendations, taking into account the standards set by European and national courts. Human rights legislation must ensure the protection of all human beings against the abuse of state power. Interference with rights must be based on the principle of proportionality. The use of policing should not pose an excessive threat of fundamental human rights violations. Interference with a particular right must be done under principle of proportionality to achieve a certain public good. In clarifying the issue of alleged violation of the right, special attention should be paid to the severity and probability of the expected threat to legal good. The Constitution of Georgia, EU and Council of Europe data protection standards, national legislation, as well as the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the National Constitutional Court are analyzed around the topic. In addition, the reports of the State Inspector, the Public Defender and the relevant scientific literature are used to study the above issues.

Jacobs, White, and Ovey: The European Convention on Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Pamela McCormick ◽  
Clare Ovey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
European Court ◽  
Forced Labour ◽  
Eighth Edition ◽  
The Right

Seventy years after the founding of the European Court of Human Rights it has dispensed more than 22,000 judgments and affects the lives of over 800 million people. The eighth edition of Jacobs, White & Ovey: The European Convention on Human Rights provides an analysis of this area of the law. Examining each of the Convention rights in turn, this book lays out the key principles. Updated with all the significant developments of the previous three years, it offers a synthesis of commentary and carefully selected case-law, focusing on the European Convention itself rather than its implementation in any one Member State. Part 1 of the book looks at institutions and procedures, including the context, enforcement, and scope of the Convention. Part 2 examines each of the Convention rights including the right to a remedy, right to life, prohibition of torture, protection from slavery and forced labour, and respect for family and private life. Part 2 also examines the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; the freedom of expression; and the freedom of assembly and association. The rights to education and elections are considered towards the end of Part 2, as are the freedoms of movement and from discrimination. Part 3 reflects on the achievements and criticisms of the Court and examines the prospects and challenges facing the Court in the present political climate and in the future.

THE BOUNDARIES PROBLEM OF THE 1950 EUROPEAN CONVENTION DYNAMIC INTERPRETATION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ON THE EXAMPLE OF ENSURING THE SOCIAL RIGHTS OF CONVICTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-125
Author(s):  
Andrew Yu. KLYUCHNIKOV
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Current Approach ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Dynamic Interpretation ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

The 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is an instrument for the dynamic development of the human rights system in the member states of the European Council. Such an active formation of the latter is due to the activities of the European Court of Human Rights. However, the case-law of the court is not always accepted in national jurisdictions, especially when it comes to the most sensitive areas of life in modern societies. As the goal of the research, the author sets out the identification of the current approach of this international court to the problem of social rights of convicts, especially in the context of ensuring their social rights. The material for the research was the case-law of the ECHR on the social rights of citizens - with special attention to the rights of persons in places of isolation from society, the legal positions of domestic researchers on the problem posed. The author uses traditional research methods - general scientific and special, with an emphasis on historical, social and legal methods. The paper describes the stages of the international soft law sources formation on penitentiary rules and the impact on this of the ECHR practice in the context of the discrimination standarts prohibition regarding the right of ownership and violation of the forced (compulsory) labor prohibition. A common European standard “the right of a convicted person to retire” has not yet been developed, which has been confirmed in the practice of the ECHR. This decision is due to the need to maintain the effectiveness of the entire convention system, the policy of compromises with states. Through the dynamic interpretation of the ECHR, this right is recognized as an element of the convention rights protection, the convict should be granted an increasing amount of social rights.

Victims and Offenders

2019 ◽  
pp. 123-150
Author(s):  
George P. Fletcher
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
International Legal Order ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

This chapter assesses the role of victims and offenders in criminal cases. The victim is invisible in the definition of crime but omnipresent in the prosecution and sentencing of offenders. In the international legal order, in particular, the victim is front and center, both in the International Criminal Court (ICC) and in lawsuits under the Alien Torts Claim Act. Crime is typically defined by the actions of the offender, and the victim is an incidental consequence. There are many victimless crimes, such as those in the sexual and reproductive arena, which in the United States at least are no longer subject to prosecution on constitutional grounds. The argument for decriminalization is the privacy of the offender, but privacy of the victim can, paradoxically, become an argument for criminalization under the right to a private life codified in the European Convention on Human Rights. The chapter also looks at the duality of victimhood.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document