THE RULE OF LAW AND THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY IN THE PRACTICE OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

Author(s):  
Andrew Yu. KLYUCHNIKOV

The article is devoted to the principle of the rule of law, implemented through the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950. (Convention) by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). The relevance of studying this principle is due to the new approach formed by the Court that the rule of law is “inherent in all articles of the Convention.” We can see its application in the current case-law of the Court as one of the fundamental elements of the independence of national courts. Thus, the author aims to identify the theoretical and practical aspects of the ECHR’s approach to the problem of judicial independence and legal application of the rule of law principle, to study the relevant Court practice. The rule of law and the independence of the judiciary as the basic elements of the convention system are an integral part of the institution of the “European public order” developed by the ECHR, therefore it is necessary to trace their interconnection. The case-law of the ECHR served as the material for the study, which allowed us to identify all stages of the formation of the rule of law principle and its actual “content”. Analyzing judicial practice, along with using doctrinal approaches, we managed to identify the limits of permissible application of national laws, the powers of bodies and officials of various branches of government, bodies of the judicial community to the given problem, new aspects of the status of judges seen as one of the democratic values of society. To achieve this, the author used methods specific to studies of law and general scientific (traditional) research methods, with an emphasis on comparative and general legal methods, and the method of induction during the analysis of judicial practice. The paper examines the normative sources of law and judicial practice of the ECHR, allowing to reveal the principle of the rule of law, its correlation with the principle of judicial independence, the specifics of its impact on the domestic national judicial system and the functioning of the state apparatus, to determine the role of the principle in the convention mechanism of the protection of human rights.

Author(s):  
Olga T. Tur ◽  
Marta B. Kravchyk ◽  
Iryna Yu. Nastasiak ◽  
Myroslava M. Sirant ◽  
Nataliya V. Stetsyuk

National and international courts are increasingly turning to generally recognised international legal principles to regulate private law relations. This is necessitated, in particular, by the fact that the issues and disputes that modern participants in private law relations address to the courts are becoming more widespread. Thus, the practice of international justice and justice in Ukraine demonstrates that such international principles as the principle of justice, equality, non-discrimination, evolutionary interpretation, proportionality, legal certainty, and the rule of law are increasingly used in dispute resolution. This study investigated the application of international principles in private law relations. Based on the general legal research methods, the nature of international legal principles was analysed, the study considered their application in the above-mentioned Ukrainian court cases to the European Court of Human Rights, as well as the Constitutional and Anti-Corruption Courts of Ukraine. The study investigated the judicial practice of the European Court of Human Rights, whose decisions raise the issue of violation of rights and fundamental freedoms stipulated in the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and non-compliance with basic international legal principles, as well as highlighted the main trends of these disputes. Based on the results of the analysis, the study identified an insufficient level of the content specification regarding the principle of the rule of law and its features in the current legislation of Ukraine, which must be properly observed by both state authorities and citizens of Ukraine. Based on the conducted research, the authors formulated their scientific positions and conclusions aimed at improving the system of principles of private law relations


Author(s):  
Ханлар Гаджиев ◽  
Khanlar Gadzhiev

The article discusses the problem of interpretation of the provisions of the European Convention on human rights by European Court of Human Rights, as well as the development of dialogue between judges of different levels, aimed at the formation of the European “common” law. Placing at the forefront the principle of the rule of law as the basis for all the guarantees of human rights, the author substantiates the necessity of the interaction of various levels courts, based on mutual respect, dialogue of the courts, what will undoubtedly lead to the enrichment of the legal system, searching for the most complete and effective regulation of social relations. According to the author, the effectiveness of interaction between courts is based primarily on a shared understanding of the importance of the activities of ECtHR judges in the development of common approaches to the protection of human rights and consolidation of the efforts in search of forming a common legal space. Using the example of some cases considered by the ECtHR, the article illustrated the options of interaction of the Court with national courts. The article reveals some problematic issues in the activity of the ECtHR, in particular the lack of involvement the principle of harmonious interpretation.


ICL Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-69
Author(s):  
Eszter Polgári

AbstractThe present article maps the explicit references to the rule of law in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR by examining the judgments of the Grand Chamber and the Plenary Court. On the basis of the structured analysis it seeks to identify the constitutive elements of the Court’s rule of law concept and contrast it with the author’s working definition and the position of other Council of Europe organs. The review of the case-law indicates that the Court primarily associates the rule of law with access to court, judicial safeguards, legality and democracy, and it follows a moderately thick definition of the concept including formal, procedural and some substantive elements. The rule of law references are predominantly ancillary arguments giving weight to other Convention-based considerations and it is not applied as a self-standing standard.


Author(s):  
Egidijus Küris

Western legal tradition gave the birth to the concept of the rule of law. Legal theory and constitutional justice significantly contributed to the crystallisation of its standards and to moving into the direction of the common concept of the rule of law. The European Court of Human Rights uses this concept as an interpretative tool, the extension of which is the quality of the law doctrine, which encompasses concrete requirements for the law under examination in this Court, such as prospectivity of law, its foreseeability, clarity etc. The author of the article, former judge of the Lithuanian Constitutional Court and currently the judge of the European Court of Human Rights, examines how the latter court has gradually intensified (not always consistently) its reliance on the rule of law as a general principle, inherent in all the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, to the extent that in some of its judgments it concentrates not anymore on the factual situation of an individual applicant, but, first and foremost, on the examination of the quality of the law. The trend is that, having found the quality of the applicable law to be insufficient, the Court considers that the mere existence of contested legislation amounts to an unjustifiable interference into a respective right and finds a violation of respective provisions of the Convention. This is an indication of the Court’s progressing self-approximation to constitutional courts, which are called to exercise abstract norm-control.La tradición occidental alumbró la noción del Estado de Derecho. La teoría del Derecho y la Justicia Constitucional han contribuido decisivamente a la cristalización de sus estándares, ayudando a conformar un acervo común en torno al mismo. El Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos emplea la noción de Estado de Derecho como una herramienta interpretativa, fundamentalmente centrada en la doctrina de la calidad de la ley, que implica requisitos concretos que exige el Tribunal tales como la claridad, la previsibilidad, y la certeza en la redacción y aplicación de la norma. El autor, en la actualidad Juez del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos y anterior Magistrado del Tribunal Constitucional de Lituania, examina cómo el primero ha intensificado gradualmente (no siempre de forma igual de consistente) su confianza en el Estado de Derecho como principio general, inherente a todos los preceptos que forman el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos, hasta el punto de que en algunas de sus resoluciones se concentra no tanto en la situación de hecho del demandante individual sino, sobre todo y ante todo, en el examen de esa calidad de la ley. La tendencia del Tribunal es a considerar que, si observa que la ley no goza de calidad suficiente, la mera existencia de la legislación discutida supone una interferencia injustificable dentro del derecho en cuestión y declara la violación del precepto correspondiente del Convenio. Esto implica el acercamiento progresivo del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos a los Tribunales Constitucionales, quienes tienen encargado el control en abstracto de la norma legal.


2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-52
Author(s):  
Mikael Lundmark

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.


2008 ◽  
Vol 57 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Thym

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.


Author(s):  
Taras Pashuk

The author analyses the concept of abuse of procedural rights with reference to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). In their applications to the ECtHR the applicants often claim that the violations the European Convention on Human Rights (the ECHR) were accompanied by various abuses by the domestic authorities. Such abuses may be of procedural nature and those matters are examined by the ECtHR quite often because the Convention is primarily aimed at protecting an individual from State arbitrariness. At the same time, the problem of abuse of procedural rights may arise before the ECtHR, when such acts were committed by an applicant. This aspect of the problem is being examined in the present article. In this regard the issue of abuse of procedural rights appears in the case-law of the ECtHR in the context of the complaints concerning the alleged violations of rights under the ECHR. This may happen when the State measures to address such a negative phenomenon (for example, penalty for the abuse of procedural right) may at the same time affect the fundamental rights under the Convention. Apart from that, this issue may arise in the context of the application of restrictive measures by the ECtHR itself due to applicants’ abuse of their right of individual petition to the ECtHR. The main features of the abuse of procedural rights arising from the case-law of the ECtHR are the following: (1) using the procedural right contrary to its purpose (in view of multiple purposes of human conduct, this condition implies the need to establish a dominant purpose in the procedural conduct of the person); (2) the presence of damage resulting from such procedural conduct; (3) the exceptional nature of such procedural conduct (implying the necessity to focus on the explicit and obvious facts of procedural abuses). The combination of these features should be used cumulatively in order to determine correctly the limits of applicability of this concept and distinguish it from other related concepts, such as legitimate use of procedural right, refusal to use the procedural right, good-faith mistake in procedural conduct. In addition, the lack of legislative regulation of this institution in the law on criminal procedure of Ukraine calls for the development of judicial practice under Article 185-3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of Ukraine as regards the administrative liability for contempt of court. It is argued that the provisions of Article 185-3 of that Code, if given appropriate judicial interpretation, can cover a wide range of procedural abuses. Keywords: abuse of procedural right, realisation of subjective right, contempt of court.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-153
Author(s):  
Gamze Ovacik

The term, de facto detention, refers to instances in which foreigners are held or deprived of their liberty usually with a view to preventing their entry into a country or expelling them from a country, but without implementing a legally prescribed detention regime that satisfies the criteria of the rule of law. The first type of de facto detention occurs when provisions regulating detention are absent or deficient in the legal framework. The second type takes place when domestic law sufficiently regulates detention regimes; however, the law is not duly implemented in practice. This article examines judicial practices in Turkey in both categories of de facto detention, analysing 37 Turkish court decisions with supporting case law from the European Court of Human Rights. Focusing on case law makes it possible both to track deficiencies in administrative practices and to analyse judicial response as a tool for rectifying unlawful administrative practices.


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 1023-1042
Author(s):  
Ljiljana Mijović

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document