The Applicability of the European Convention for Human Rights in Contested Territories

This article examines the applicability of the European Convention for Human Rights (ECHR) when a State loses control over parts of its territory. It argues that the jurisprudence of the European Court for Human Rights, which insists on residual positive obligations based in sovereign title over territory, is problematic and needs to be rethought. The Court’s current approach is not only likely to provoke backlash, since it requires it to decide politically explosive questions of sovereign title, but does so for very little practical benefit for the protection of human rights. The article therefore explores more preferable alternatives.

THE APPLICABILITY OF THE ECHR IN CONTESTED TERRITORIES

International and Comparative Law Quarterly ◽

10.1017/s0020589318000234 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 67 (4) ◽

pp. 779-800 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Marko Milanović ◽

Tatjana Papić

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Current Approach ◽

European Convention ◽

European Court ◽

AbstractThis article examines the applicability of the European Convention for Human Rights (ECHR) when a State loses control over parts of its territory. It argues that the jurisprudence of the European Court for Human Rights, which insists on residual positive obligations based in sovereign title over territory, is problematic and needs to be rethought. The Court's current approach is not only likely to provoke backlash, since it requires it to decide politically explosive questions of sovereign title, but does so for very little practical benefit for the protection of human rights. The article therefore explores more preferable alternatives.

III.B.8b Protocol (No. 2) to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms Conferring upon the European Court of Human Rights Competence to Give Advisory Opinions (6 May 1963)

International Law & World Order ◽

10.1163/ilwo-iiib8b ◽

2014 ◽

pp. 1-1

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

European Convention ◽

European Court ◽

Fundamental Freedoms ◽

Advisory Opinions

IMPLEMENTATION OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES IN HUMAN RIGHTS TO HEALTHCARE

Wiadomości Lekarskie ◽

10.36740/wlek202007142 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 73 (7) ◽

pp. 1539-1544

Author(s):

Volodymyr V. Marchenko ◽

Inna I. Kilimnik ◽

Alla V. Dombrovska

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Digital Technologies ◽

European Convention ◽

Structural Method ◽

Legal Analysis ◽

The European Union ◽

Blockchain Technology ◽

European Court ◽

Analysis And Synthesis ◽

The aim: The aim of the study is to examine the blockchain technology in the field of healthcare, to analyze the principles of the European Convention on Human Rights regarding respect for private and family life, home and correspondence, to analyze the key positions of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter – ECHR) in the field of human rights to privacy, to analyze the European Union (hereinafter – EU) secondary legislation regarding the supply of medicines, prospects for the blockchain usage in order to protect human rights to privacy and improve the quality of medicines. Materials and methods: Scientific works that are devoted to the outspread of digital technologies in healthcare, the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, the ECHR’s practice on the protection of human rights to privacy, the provisions of the EU secondary legislation that regulate the supply of medicines are studied. The methodology of this article is based on comparative and legal analysis techniques and includes system-structural method, method of generalization, method of analysis and synthesis as well. Conclusions: The blockchain technology in medicine and pharmacology will increase the level of protection of human rights to healthcare quality.

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

European Journal of Health Law ◽

10.1163/15718093-bja10024 ◽

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 ◽

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.

Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy. Application No. 27765/09

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.5305/amerjintelaw.107.2.0417 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 107 (2) ◽

pp. 417-423 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Irini Papanicolopulu

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

European Convention ◽

International Convention ◽

European Court ◽

The Status ◽

Grand Chamber ◽

Effective Remedy ◽

Maritime Search And Rescue ◽

The Right

In a unanimous judgment in the case Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (Court) held that Italy’s “push back” operations interdicting intending migrants and refugees at sea and returning them to Libya amounted to a violation of the prohibition of torture and other inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 of the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR or Convention), the prohibition of collective expulsions under Article 4 of Protocol 4 to the Convention, and the right to an effective remedy under Article 13 of the Convention. Hirsi Jamaa is the Court’s first judgment on the interception of migrants at sea and it addresses issues concerning the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 1979 International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, as well as the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.

The European Court of Human Rights and the Protection of Arctic Indigenous Peoples Rights

The Yearbook of Polar Law Online ◽

10.1163/22116427_009010003 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 24-52

Author(s):

Mikael Lundmark

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Indigenous Peoples ◽

Active Role ◽

Case Law ◽

Historical Background ◽

The Arctic ◽

European Convention ◽

European Court ◽

Solid Foundation

Based on an ongoing case in Sweden, where Girjas Sami village sued the Swedish state for violation of property rights, this article examines the European Court of Human Rights’ potential influence in the Arctic region’s legal system when it comes to protection of property of Arctic indigenous peoples. This article shows that notwithstanding the historical background of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the case law of the Court provides a solid foundation to advocate that the Court can take a more active role in protecting the rights of Arctic indigenous peoples. What is different in the case of indigenous peoples is that their rights pre-exist that of a modern state, and this does not correlate with the structure of the Convention, which seemingly leads to less protection under the Convention for indigenous peoples. This puts a higher level of responsibility both upon the applicants, as well as on the Court to scrutinize, and apply, the case law of the Court in line with the Convention and the adopted principle of interpretation.

Some decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of the European Union con cerning the right of asylum

Comparative Research In Law and Politics ◽

10.12737/5251 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

pp. 68-74

Author(s):

Габриэлла Белова ◽

Gabriela Belova ◽

Мария Хаджипетрова-Лачова ◽

Maria Hadzhipetrova-Lachova

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

Human Rights ◽

European Convention ◽

The European Union ◽

Protective Mechanisms ◽

Eu Member States ◽

European Court ◽

The Right ◽

The Eu

The authors analyze certain cases considered in recent years by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of European Union in Luxembourg and associated with providing of asylum to the third country nationals. In individual EU member states there are huge differences in the procedures and protective mechanisms for asylum seekers in their access to work, as well as in the use of mechanism of forced detention. Due to accession of the EU to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the EU should comply the standards set by the Council of Europe. The authors analyze the new approach of the Strasbourg Court in decision MSS v. Belgium and Greece unlike other "Dublin" cases. They also consider certain new judgements of the Court of European Union in Luxembourg, some of which were accepted in order of urgent prejudicial production.

RESPECT FOR PRIVATE AND FAMILY LIFE UNDER ARTICLE 8 ECHR IN IMMIGRATION CASES: A HUMAN RIGHT TO REGULARIZE ILLEGAL STAY?

International and Comparative Law Quarterly ◽

10.1017/s0020589308000043 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 57 (1) ◽

pp. 87-112 ◽

Cited By ~ 19

Author(s):

Daniel Thym

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Case Law ◽

Private Life ◽

European Convention ◽

Human Right ◽

Human Rights Protection ◽

Immigration Laws ◽

European Court ◽

The Status ◽

AbstractApplying the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to immigration cases has always been a balancing exercise between the effective protection of human rights and the Contracting States' autonomy to regulate migration flows. In its recent case law, the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg (ECtHR) has considerably extended the protective scope of Article 8 ECHR by granting autonomous human rights protection to the long-term resident status independent of the existence of family bonds under the heading of ‘private life’. This has important repercussions for the status of legal and illegal immigrants across Europe, since the new case law widens the reach of human rights law to the legal conditions for leave to remain, effectively granting several applicants a human right to regularize their illegal stay. The contribution analyses the new case law and develops general criteria guiding the application of the ECHR to national immigration laws and the new EU harmonization measures adopted in recent years.

The ‘Iukos Affair’. The Russian Judiciary and the European Court of Human Rights

Review of Central and East European Law ◽

10.1163/092598812x13274154887349 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 38 (1) ◽

pp. 77-108 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Laurence A. Groen

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

The Other ◽

European Convention ◽

Undue Influence ◽

European Court ◽

Russian State ◽

Fundamental Freedoms ◽

Structural Nature ◽

This note analyzes the functioning of the Russian judiciary on the basis of the European Court of Human Rights’ judgments in the cases of OAO Neftianaia Kompaniia Iukos and three of the company’s former leading executives, Mikhail Borisovich Khodorkovskii, Platon Leonidovich Lebedev and the late Vasilii Aleksanian. The analysis turns to the breaches by the Russian state of Articles 5 (right to liberty and security), 6 (right to a fair trial) and 18 (permissible restrictions to the rights guaranteed) of the 1950 European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as established by the Court in the aforementioned cases, and the role of the Russian judiciary therein. In light of the fundamental flaws and structural nature characterizing the violations found, the conclusion is reached that the Russian judiciary (still) appears not to be entirely free from undue influence by the other branches of government.

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

International Legal Materials ◽

10.5305/intelegamate.51.1.0001 ◽

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 ◽

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.