scholarly journals The Protection of Human Rights in Post-Communist Albania

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 63
Author(s):  
Meljana Bregu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Communist Regime ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Revolutionary Movement ◽  
The Past ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

Albania was one of the most isolated countries in Europe for nearly 45 years. During the communist era, the legal system was under the direct control of the Party of Labor. The protection of human rights in the first years of the communist regime was clearly shaped on the soviet principles. The criminal code of Albania was the symbol of a repressive system, regardless of human rights protection, crimes punishable by death were sanctioned by various articles, including “agitation and propaganda against the state” and ‘activities against the revolutionary movement of the working class”. Hoxha also closed the Ministry of Justice and banned the private practice of law as a consequence the right to a fair trial was denied. After the fall of communism Albania has made significant progress toward respect for civil and political rights, especially toward the right to a fair trial. The constitution of 1998 protects the right to a fair trial in chapter two and one important step is the ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights in 1996, which guarantee the right to a fair trial in article six. Still, 25 years of transformation are not enough to wipe away the legacy of the past; the lack of human rights mechanisms poses a serious challenge to the Albanian democratic system. Still today Albania faces important issues concerning the protection of human rights generally and particularly the right to a fair trial. This fact is evident if we refer to the cases of the European Court of human rights versus Albania dealing with the application of article 6 of the Convention.The paper aims to address the protection of human rights after the demise of the communist regime, especially regarding the right to a fair trail, analyzing the progress but also the continuity in some aspects with the past.

scholarly journals On the Issue of Inadmissibility of Infringing the Right to a Fair Trial of Criminal Cases under the Guise of Protecting State Sovereignty

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 176-182
Author(s):  
A A Timoshenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

The author examines the issue of the prospects for the direct application of human rights standards in the regulation of criminal procedural activity. In this regard, the key attention is paid to the provisions of art. 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as art. 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the right to a fair trial of criminal cases. It is assumed that only a fair and impartial court is able to ensure the progressive development of society, its stability and security of citizens. Based on the analysis of the main possible ways of further development of the criminal procedural legislation, one of which is related to the increase of formal requirements for criminal procedural activity, and the other - with increased attention to the natural-legal principles of the application of the law, preference is given to the second approach. Based on the analysis of the monuments of world jurisprudence, the study of the history of the formation of international human rights law, it is concluded that it is impossible to overcome the progressive movement towards the triumph of the humanitarian status of the person recognized by the international community. In this regard, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, assessing the correctness of the European Court of Human Rights interpretation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, should be guided by world standards. In addition, there is a need for widespread respect for the need to respect the right to a fair trial.

Does the Injunction Gap Violate Implementers’ Fair Trial Rights Under the ECHR?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léon E Dijkman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Federal Supreme ◽  
Validity Of A Patent

Abstract Germany is one of few jurisdictions with a bifurcated patent system, under which infringement and validity of a patent are established in separate proceedings. Because validity proceedings normally take longer to conclude, it can occur that remedies for infringement are imposed before a decision on the patent’s validity is available. This phenomenon is colloquially known as the ‘injunction gap’ and has been the subject of increasing criticism over the past years. In this article, I examine the injunction gap from the perspective of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. I find that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights interpreting this provision supports criticism of the injunction gap, because imposing infringement remedies with potentially far-reaching consequences before the validity of a patent has been established by a court of law arguably violates defendants’ right to be heard. Such reliance on the patent office’s grant decision is no longer warranted in the light of contemporary invalidation rates. I conclude that the proliferation of the injunction gap should be curbed by an approach to a stay of proceedings which is in line with the test for stays as formulated by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court. Under this test, courts should stay infringement proceedings until the Federal Patent Court or the EPO’s Board of Appeal have ruled on the validity of a patent whenever it is more likely than not that it will be invalidated.

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

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 ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
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.

scholarly journals НЕКИ АСПЕКТИ ПРАВА НА СУДСКУ ЗАШТИТУ ЛИЦА СА МЕНТАЛНИМ СМЕТЊАМА У ПОСТУПКУ ЛИШЕЊА ПОСЛОВНЕ СПОСОБНОСТИ - ПРАКСА ЕВРОПСКОГ СУДА ЗА ЉУДСКА ПРАВА

TEME ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 581
Author(s):  
Dušica Palačković ◽  
Sanda Ćorac
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Legal Capacity ◽  
Mental Disabilities ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
European Court ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

The paper analyzes certain important aspects of the procedural position of persons with mental disabilities in the procedures for deprivation of legal capacity. Regardless of the normative framework, both international and national, which largely protects the rights of this sensitive group of people, a significant number of cases before the European Court of Human Rights and decisions in which Contracting States are declared responsible indicate that there is a problem of their procedural position that is principally conditioned by applying (or not applying) the procedural safeguards provided by Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, or the right to a fair trial. Although this right is guaranteed for all civil and criminal procedures and for all persons, the special features of persons with mental disabilities also determine the particularities in the application of the right to a fair trial in the court procedures in which these persons are involved. Therefore, we could talk about formulated specific standards that essentially elaborate one of the key concepts of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities - "reasonable adaptation", as well as a direct link to the need for a specific application of the already mentioned Article 6 of the European Convention. The standards that follow from the application of Article 6 are numerous and the analysis of all from the aspect of protecting the rights of persons with mental disabilities is not possible in the paper of this volume, and therefore, special attention was given to the right of these persons to initiate and conduct the procedures for deprivation of legal capacity, personal participation and representation in that procedures.

The Right to Compensation for Wrongful Conviction/Miscarriage of Justice in International Law

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 215-244
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Wrongful Conviction ◽  
European Court ◽  
Human Rights Treaties ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
African Commission ◽  
Miscarriage Of Justice

Human rights treaties (including Article 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr); Article 3 of the Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; and Article 10 of the American Convention on Human Rights) explicitly protect the right to compensation for wrongful conviction or miscarriage of justice. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights is silent on this right. The Human Rights Committee, the European Court of Human Rights, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have developed rich jurisprudence on the ambit of the right to compensation for wrongful conviction or miscarriage of justice. States have adopted different approaches to give effect to their obligation under Article 14(6) of the iccpr. Relying on the practice and/or jurisprudence from States in Africa, Europe, North America, Asia, and Latin America and on the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee, the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the article illustrates the approaches taken by some States to give effect to Article 14(6) of the iccpr and the relevant regional human rights instruments.

scholarly journals Citizenship Deprivation under the European Convention-System: A Case Study of Belgium

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-282
Author(s):  
Louise Reyntjens
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
System A ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Foreign Fighters

In response to Islamic-inspired terrorism and the growing trend of foreign fighters, European governments are increasingly relying on citizenship deprivation as a security tool. This paper will focus on the question of how the fundamental rights of individuals deprived of their citizenship are affected and which protection is offered for them by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (‘ECHR’). In many countries, these new and broader deprivation powers were left unaccompanied by stronger (procedural) safeguards that protect the human rights they might affect. Unlike the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the ECHR does not provide for an explicit right to citizenship. The question therefore rises what protection, if any, is offered by the ECHRsystem against citizenship deprivation and for the right to citizenship. Through a case study of the Belgian measure of citizenship deprivation, the (implicit) protection provided by the Convention-system is demonstrated.

scholarly journals Ensuring the Right to a Fair Trial Pre-Trial Stage Criminal Process

2016 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 133-141
Author(s):  
A A Tymoshenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Criminal Process ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

The article considers the problem of respect for the right to a fair trial at the pre-trial stage of the criminal process. It is pro- posed to take into account the secondary role of pre-trial activity, whose task is to prepare materials for trial. This competitiveness for the prosecution is not allowed. Analysis of the European Court of Human Rights indicates sufficient blurring boundaries that separate statement of the facts of the presence or absence of a violation of Art. 6 of the European Convention «On Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms» (the right to a fair trial). But in any case the decision is motivated by the observance of guarantees of access to justice. Hence, any infringement of the possibi

scholarly journals Oral public hearing in an administrative dispute

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 487-502
Author(s):  
Renata Bjelica
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Hearing ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

The right to an oral public hearing is covered by the right to a fair trial as a right guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as well as by the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. In this sense, the Law on Administrative Disputes prescribes a rule for the court to establish the facts at an oral public hearing. This law prescribes exceptions to the rule, as well as cases in which the court will "always" and in which it is "obliged" to hold an oral public hearing. Analyzing the legal provisions, with reference to the relevant administrative and constitutional caselaw, and considering the present organization and capacity of the administrative judiciary, the author pointed to certain shortcomings of legislative solutions and administrative judicial decisions, and based on the conclusions drawn, tried to offer possible solutions so that, when it comes to holding a hearing before a court, a higher degree of fairness of trial could be achieved.

scholarly journals A New Model of Appeal Proceedings in Criminal Cases: Acceleration v. Fairness? A Few Remarks from the Perspective of the Standards of Protecting Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 187
Author(s):  
Małgorzata Wąsek-Wiaderek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
First Time

<p>The purpose of this study is to present and evaluate the main changes to the appeal proceedings model introduced in the last few years to the Polish criminal proceedings in order to accelerate it and, thereby, satisfy the requirements of Article 6 (1) of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The article presents arguments supporting the thesis whereby these have weakened the right of the defendant to appeal against the judgement. Under the currently applicable regulations, it is permissible that an appellate court may impose a penalty for the first time which cannot be subject to an effective appellate review. Such a solution may raise doubts as to its compliance with Article 14 (5) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The article also formulates a thesis whereby the newly introduced measure – a complaint against the cassatory judgement of the appellate court – contrary to preliminary fears, has not in fact “blown up” the system of appeal measures in the Polish criminal proceedings. At the same time, despite the relatively small scope of its use, it may contribute to strengthening the appeal – as opposed to the revisory – model of appellate proceedings and thus accelerating the criminal proceedings. This thesis is based on the research of all complaints brought to the Supreme Court in 2016–2019.</p>

scholarly journals THE PROHIBITION OF TORTURE, CRUEL OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENT IN CLOSED INSTITUTIONS

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (91) ◽  
pp. 23-29
Author(s):  
Jelena Girfanova
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
European Regional

In the paper “The prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment in closed Institutions” the author has examined the obxervasnce of  persons’  in detention,  custody or imprisonment human rights in the European regional acts and national instruments as well as the provision of health care for detainees and convicted persons alike.All basic human rights’ documents, namely: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the United Nations and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms state that “no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, degrading his or her human dignity”.  All persons who have been punished, regardless of the crimes for which they were convicted, have the right to humane treatment and respect for their personality. No actions of people, whatever they may be, justify the inhuman treatment of them or the humiliation of their personality.  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document