The Case-Law Concept of Reasonable Accommodation: The European Court of Human Rights Facing the Governance of Cultural and Religious Diversity in the Public Space

Author(s):  
Antonio López Castillo

En la reciente jurisprudencia del TEDH se advierte una cierta modulación, de lo subjetivo a lo objetivo, en un contexto de controvertida reconsideración nacional de las sociedades abiertas de la Europa en crisis. De ello se trata aquí atendiendo a dos manifestaciones de conflictos de diverso porte y alcance; a propósito, la una, del inclusivo ámbito de la enseñanza, y relativa, la otra, a la regulación de acceso al espacio público mediante reglas excluyentes, de prevención general, pretendidamente instrumentales al aseguramiento de la salvaguarda de la convivencia, de la vida en común.The recent case law of the European Court of Human Rights shows a certain modulation, from the subjective to the objective, in a context of controversial national reconsideration of the open societies of Europe in crisis. This is what we are dealing with here in the light of two manifestations of conflicts of different sizes and scope; purposefully, one, of the inclusive field of education, and relative, the other, to the regulation of access to public space by means of excluding rules, of general prevention, supposedly instrumental to ensuring the safeguarding of coexistence, of living together.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 333-360
Author(s):  
Jonathan Collinson

Abstract This article rationalises the case law of the European Court of Human Rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in deportation cases involving children. The Court engages in a balancing exercise between the right to family life of the deportee’s family on the one side, and the public interest in deportation on the other. This article expands on existing case law analysis by suggesting that in deportation cases, the Court considers Article 8 as a form of commonly held right, rather than an individual right held by one member of the family. Furthermore, the balance is argued to be constructed as a relationship between two factors on both sides, rather than of a sole factor on either side as being determinative. This article concludes that the best interests of the child (one of the ‘Üner criteria’) is not adequately reflected in the Court’s deportation decision-making practice.


ICL Journal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benito Aláez Corral

AbstractThis work deals critically with the Islamic full veil ban in public spaces, that is start­ing to be adopted in some European countries and is being echoed in some regulations in Spanish municipalities. After a brief analysis of the general bans recently passed in Belgium and France and of the partial bans adopted in schools by other countries, like Germany, Ita­ly or the UK, the article analyses the constitutionality of the recently approved municipal bans in Spain from a constitutional perspective, including the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The author reaches the conclusion that according to the Sp Const 1978 an adequate interpretation of the limitations to the freedom of religion and the right to one’s own image, involved when wearing an Islamic full veil, would make a general ban on the full veil in each and every public space unconstitutional, but would allow its partial ban regarding the access to municipal buildings or services or regarding teachers and pupils at schools, as far as these partial bans could be justified by constitutional values like safeguarding of public institutions or services, or protecting the fundamental rights of others. `


Author(s):  
Benito Aláez Corral

This work deals critically with the islamic full veil ban in public spaces, that is starting to be adopted in some European countries and has found echo in some regulations of spanish municipalities. After a brief analysis of the general bans recently passed in Belgium and France and of the partial bans adopted at schools by other countries, like Germany, Italy or the UK, the article analises from a constitutional perspective, that includes the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, the constitutionality of the recently established local bans in Spain. The author reaches the conclusion that according to the Sp. Const. 1978 an adequate interpretation of the limitations to the freedom of religion and right to the own image, involved when wearing an islamic full veil, would make unconstitutional a general ban of the full veil in each and every public space, but would constitutionally allow its partial ban regarding the access to municipal buildings or services or regarding teachers and pupils at public institutions of education, when these partial bans could be justified by constitutionally values like the safeguarding of public institutions or services, or like the protection of the fundamental rights of others.En este trabajo se analizan críticamente las prohibiciones del uso del velo islámico integral en los espacios públicos que empiezan a proliferar en Europa y de las que empiezan a hacerse eco algunos Ayuntamientos españoles. Tras un somero análisis de las prohibiciones generales por las que se han inclinado Bélgica y Francia, y de las prohibiciones parciales que predominan en otros Estados, como Alemania, Italia o el Reino Unido, en ámbitos como el escolar se evalúa desde una perspectiva jurídico-constitucional, que incluye la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, las prohibiciones que empiezan a reclamarse y establecerse en España. El autor llega a la conclusión de que una interpretación dogmáticamente adecuada a la CE de 1978 de las limitaciones posibles a los derechos a la libertad religiosa y a la propia imagen, implicados con el uso del velo integral islámico, hace constitucionalmente ilícita una prohibición general del mismo en todos los espacios públicos, pero permite justificar prohibiciones parciales, como las recientemente adoptadas en algunos municipios españoles para el acceso a edificios o servicios municipales, o las impuestas a alumnos y docentes en centros escolares públicos, en la medida en que estén dirigidas a garantizar el correcto funcionamiento de las instituciones y los servicios públicos y/o a la protección de los derechos de los demás.


ICL Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Krasser

Abstract The multiple COVID-19 vaccines developed over the past months are typically thought of as the only means to meet the challenges posed by the current pandemic. Still, the public opinion on vaccines is heavily divided. And, of course, discussions about compulsory vaccination, oftentimes based on fundamental rights arguments, tend to become heated. This note This note builds on the arguments developed in the author’s master thesis Anja Krasser, ‘Die grundrechtliche Zulässigkeit einer Impfpflicht in Österreich’ (Universität Graz 2019) which have previously been summarized in Anja Krasser, ‘Zur grundrechtlichen Zulässigkeit einer Impfpflicht’ (2020) 2020/206 RdM 136. analyses the issues at hand based on the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).


Medicne pravo ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (2) ◽  
pp. 24-33
Author(s):  
I. O. BOGOMAZOVA ◽  
◽  

The article covers the issue of dissemination of negative information about the doctor on the example of the European Court of Human Rights case law. It has been emphasized on the circumstances in which it seems possible to strike a fair balance between a doctors’ right to protect their business reputation and the freedom of expression of others. It has been established that the business reputation of the doctors is closely related to the ethical norms of their behavior. Dissemination of negative information, in particular, about the doctor is one of the manifestations of freedom of expression. However, it is important to remember that such negative information shall be true; otherwise, this activ- ity would not comply with the law. In the case of a restriction of a person’s right to freedom of expression, the European Court of Human Rights proposes to take into account the following factors: whether such a restriction was based on law, whether it pursued one or more legitimate aims and whether it was necessary in a democratic society to achieve those aims. Of course, the dissemination of negative information about a doctor affects his or her business reputation, but in order to achieve a fair balance between competing interests in this area (provided that such information was true) the public interest will prevail, because the dissemination of health information is of particular interest for the public. A fair balance in these relations will also provide such circumstances as: good faith and ethical behavior of those who publish negative information, the way the material is presented, the validity of the information disseminated, the real ability of the doctor to respond to these allegations. Key words: business reputation of a doctor, dissemination of information, European Court of Human Rights.


Author(s):  
Juan M. VELÁZQUEZ GARDETA

LABURPENA: Giza Eskubideen Europako Auzitegiaren Negrepontis-Giannisis vs. Grezia epaiak atzerriko erabakiak libre zirkulatzeko bidea zabaldu du, prozesu zuzen bat izateko eskubidetik etorria, Giza Eskubideen Europako Hitzarmeneko 6.1 artikuluan aitortua. GEEAren jurisprudentzia-lerro horren eboluzioa abiatzen da Wagner eta J.M.W.L. vs. Luxenburgo eta McDonald vs. Frantzia erabakiekin, baina guk aipatzen duguna aurrerapausoa handia da, eskubidea ez zaiolako lotzen beste zuzenbide substantibo bati, eta berezko eskubidea dela planteatzen da. Gainera, ohar aipagarriak egiten dira atzerriko epai judizialak geldiarazteko ordena publikoko salbuespenari buruz, eta haien eragina leuntzen da. Oso interesgarria da EBko arautegien aplikazio-esparrutik ihes egiten duten erabakietan aplikatzeko, non exequaturra desagertzen den ad hoc prozedura gisa, baina eragindako alderdiak hura ez aitortzeko aukera mantentzen da. Ildo horretan, GEEAk Negrepontis-en erabilitako argudioak garrantzi berezikoak dira, kontuan hartuz GEEHk inspiratzen duela Batasuneko Zuzenbidea eta auzitegiak egiten duen artikuluen interpretazioa. RESUMEN: El Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos abre en su sentencia Negrepontis-Giannisis c. Grecia una vía de ampliación de las posibilidades a la libre circulación de decisiones extranjeras como un derecho derivado del derecho a un proceso equitativo reconocido en el art. 6.1 del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos. La evolución de esta línea jurisprudencial del TEDH arranca con las decisiones Wagner y J.M.W.L. c. Luxemburgo y McDonald c. Francia pero en la que nos ocupa se produce un avance considerable porque no se ata el derecho al reconocimiento a otro derecho sustantivo sino que se plantea como un derecho en sí mismo. Además se establecen notables consideraciones en cuanto a la excepción de orden público como freno a la ejecución de decisiones judiciales extranjeras y se suaviza su efecto. Es especialmente interesante para su aplicación en aquellas decisiones que escapan del ámbito de aplicación de los correspondientes reglamentos de la UE donde desaparece el exequátur como procedimiento ad hoc pero se mantiene la posibilidad de oposición al reconocimiento por la parte afectada. En este sentido, los argumentos utilizados por el TEDH en Negrepontis son de especial relevancia, teniendo en cuenta el carácter inspirador del Derecho de la Unión que tiene el CEDH y por ende de la interpretación que dicho tribunal haga de su articulado. ABSTRACT: The European Court of Human Rights in its judgment Negrepontis-Giannisis v. Greece opens the extension of the possibilities for a free movement of foreign decisions as a right derived from the right to a fair hearing of article 6.1 of the European Convention of Human Rights. The evolution of this case law trend of the ECHR begins with decisions Wagner and J.M.W.L. v. Luxembourg and McDonald v. France but in the judgment we are now analyzing a considerable development is made because the right to the recognizition is not linked to other substantive right but it is considered as a right itself. Besides remarkable considerations are established as far as the exception to the public order is concerned as a brake to the execution of foreign judicial decisions and it softens its effect. It is especially interesting for its application in those decisions that go beyond the scope of application of the corresponding regulations of the EU where the exequatur as an ad hoc procedure is missing but it maintains the possibility of opposition to the recognizition by the affected party. In this sense, the reasoning of the ECHR in Negrepontis is of special relevance, taking into account the inspiring character of the European Law forthe ECHR and hence the interpretation of that Tribunal of its articles.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Delia Ferri

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) explicitly embeds the concept of reasonable accommodation within the principle of non-discrimination. Article 2 of the CRPD unambiguously recognizes that reasonable accommodation is vital in enabling persons with disabilities to enjoy and exercise their rights on an equal basis with others. This article argues that in the ten years since its entry into force, the CRPD has stimulated a process of cross-fertilization. In particular, it contends that the CRPD has played a crucial role in the advancement of disability equality, and in the recognition of reasonable accommodation as a gateway to the equal enjoyment of all human rights within the European human rights system. By adopting a legal perspective and a traditional doctrinal approach, this article focuses on relevant European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) case law. It shows the gradual adoption by the ECtHR of the concept of reasonable accommodation as an essential element to remove specific barriers or disadvantages to which a particular disabled individual would otherwise be subject. The primary emphasis of this short article is on the ECtHR case law and on the extent to which it has translated the CRPD and the work of the CRPD Committee into the European human rights system.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document