scholarly journals Rethinking Suresh: Refoulement to Torture Under Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms

2009 ◽  
pp. 125-160
Author(s):  
David Jenkins
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Supreme Court Of Canada ◽  
European Court ◽  
Canadian Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
Degrading Treatment

This article takes the European Court of Human Rights’ decision in Saadi v. Italy and uses it as an opportunity to re-examine the Canadian case of Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration). The author argues that the national security exception in Suresh is no longer tenable in light of subsequent developments in both international and Canadian law. The author concludes that the Supreme Court of Canada should reject the Suresh exception at its first opportunity and adopt an approach to review of refoulement cases similar to that under the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

scholarly journals The legal meaning of the terms "torture", "inhuman treatment or punishment", "degrading treatment or punishment" and their distinction in the decisions of the European commission of human rights and the European court of human rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 26-33
Author(s):  
Khrystyna YAMELSKA
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Legal Meaning

The paper reveals the legal meaning of the terms "torture", "inhuman treatment or punishment", "treatment or punishment that degrades human dignity". A distinction between these concepts is made on the examples of court decisions of European courts, taking into account the individual circumstances of each case. The genesis of the origin of the above concepts is investigated through a prism of the decisions of the European Commission of Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights. The paper reveals the absolute nature of the "jus cogens" norm of Article 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The author proposes to modernize the Ukrainian criminal legislation on the reception of the position of the European Court of Human Rights on the delimitation of these concepts. In contrast to the European convention regulation of ill-treatment, torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, the author notes that the Ukrainian legislation regulates this issue quite succinctly. The Article 127 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine provides a definition only of torture, which in essence coincides with the definition of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the position of the European Court of Human Rights. The paper notes that the practice of Ukrainian courts shows that a distinction (similar to that provided by the European Court of Human Rights) is not implemented.

scholarly journals UKRAINIAN COURTS AND THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS

2016 ◽  
pp. 68-75
Author(s):  
Victor Muraviov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Efficient Protection ◽  
Independent Functioning ◽  
Positive Effect

The article is focused on the interaction between the Ukrainian courts of general jurisdiction and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the area of the protection of human rights. There is emphasized that their independent functioning does not provide for the efficient protection of individual rights and freedoms and significantly increases the number of the judicial recourses of the Ukrainian citizens to the European Court of Human Rights. Particular attention is paid to the role of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the protection of human rights, which combines the functions of the constitutional control and constitutional supervision. Its activities are focused on the official interpretation on the Constitution of Ukraine. Attention is paid to the list those who may bring the actions before the Constitutional Court, which includes apart from the state bodies the natural and legal persons. The is mentioning of the issues on initiating of proceedings before the Court. Also broadly is analyzed Constitutional Court’ activities concerning the interpretation of the Constitution in the light of the European Convention on Human Rights and other international agreements dealing with the protection of human rights. The article stresses on the contribution of other Ukrainian courts in the affirmation of the constitutional concept of the protection of human rights and freedoms in Ukraine. The majority of resolutions of such highest judicial body in the system of courts of general jurisdiction as the Supreme Court of Ukraine concern the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. As it is emphasized in the article the independent functioning on the Constitutional Court and the courts of general jurisdiction does not provide for the cooperation between both branches of courts. Courts of general jurisdiction feel free as to the appeal to the Constitutional Court. Even when such appeals are directed to Constitutional Court the decisions of the letter are not binding to the courts of general jurisdiction. Special attention is paid to the introduction of the institute of constitutional complaint and its positive effect on the judicial mechanism of the protection of human rights in Ukraine.

scholarly journals The practice of the Supreme Court and the decisions of the European Court concluding violations of artic - le 3 of the Convention

2020 ◽  
pp. 413-417
Author(s):  
Alla Radzivill
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Effective System ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
European Standards ◽  
The Right

Law enforcement practice of the Supreme Court in cases involving torture in the light of the standards of the European Court ofHuman Rights. The article is devoted to the study of individual legal positions of the Supreme Court, their coordination with the practiceof the European Court of Human Rights. The author emphasizes that the decisions of the European Court should serve as precedents,which will make it impossible to produce diametrically opposite decisions on similar categories of cases. Analysis of the problem ofcriminal responsibility for torture allows us to form conclusions and suggestions that are important for the development of the theoryof criminal law and the improvement of law enforcement practice.The article deals with the issues related to the peculiarities of the interpretation and application of Article 3 of the European Conventionon Human Rights of the European Court of Human Rights. In particular, the scope of Article 3 has been analyzed; it has been de -fined, what is necessary to understand under concepts of torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Substantive and proceduralaspects of violations of the prohibition of torture have been revealed, as well as positive and negative obligations of a state to providethe effective protection of the right. The standards of the appropriate assessment of ill-treatment and the main aspects of judicial qualificationof a particular form of mistreatment as torture have been analyzed. The procedural guarantees, which must be provided for each personat the stage of pre-trial investigation, non-observance of which leads to a breach of Article 3 of the Convention, have been determined.Creation of the effective system of protection of human rights and its efficiency is analysed in relation to the crime of “torture”in the context of European Convention on human rights, which must be in future stored and taken for basis for a further improvementand systematization of the single European standards in area of human rights.

scholarly journals TEDH ante la violencia contra la mujer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maite Carretero Sanjuan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Gender Violence ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
History Of ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
First Time

El Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH), como máxima autoridad para la garantía de los derechos humanos y libertades fundamentales en Europa, tiene como finalidad específica la de garantizar el cumplimiento del Convenio Europeo de Protección de los Derechos Humanos y Libertades Fundamentales (CEDH), firmado en Roma, el 4 de noviembre de 1950. Si bien este texto, en sí, no contiene una regulación de específica protección para los casos de violencia de género y otros tipos de violencia contra la mujer, la casuística es perfectamente encuadrable en su contenido y, por ende, enjuiciable por este Tribunal. Y ello, precisamente, por el encaje de este tipo de violencia en el artículo 3 del CEDH, a cuyo tenor: “Nadie podrá ser sometido a tortura ni a penas o tratos inhumanos o degradantes”. En este sentido se pronuncia la Sentencia Opuz vs. Turquía, de 9 de junio de 2009, que conlleva la condena, por primera vez en la historia del TEDH, de un Estado parte por violencia doméstica y malos tratos. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), as the highest authority for the guarantee of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Europe, has the specific purpose of ensuring compliance with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), signed in Rome on 4 November 1950. Although this text, in itself, does not contain a regulation of specific protection for cases of gender violence and other types of violence against women, the casuistry can be perfectly framed in its content and, therefore, prosecuted by this Court. This is precisely because this type of violence is covered by Article 3 of the ECHR, which states: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment". In this sense, the Opuz v. Turkey Judgment of 9 June 2009 is pronounced, which entails the condemnation, for the first time in the history of the ECtHR, of a state party for domestic violence and ill-treatment.

Re Application by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission for Judicial Review (Northern Ireland); Reference by Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland Pursuant to Paragraph 33 of Schedule 10 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998 (Abortion) (Northern Ireland)

2021 ◽  
Vol 194 ◽  
pp. 531-680
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Family Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Abortion Law ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
Degrading Treatment

531Human rights — Rights of women in Northern Ireland — Pregnant women and girls — Autonomy and bodily integrity — Right to respect for private and family life — Rights of persons with disabilities — Right not to be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment — Abortion law in Northern Ireland — Prohibition on abortion in cases of serious malformation of foetus, rape and incest — Balancing of rights — Whether moral and political issues relevant — Role of courts and Parliament — Whether abortion law incompatible with Articles 3 and 8 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether declaration of incompatibility should be madeHuman rights — Right to respect for private and family life — Qualified right — Abortion law in Northern Ireland — Prohibition on abortion in cases of serious malformation of foetus, rape and incest — Interference with right to respect for private and family life under Article 8 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether interference justified — Whether interference prescribed by law — Whether having legitimate aim — Whether necessary in democratic society — Whether proportionate — In case of fatal foetal abnormality — In case of rape — In case of incest — In case of serious foetal abnormality — Balancing of rights — European Court of Human Rights — Margin of appreciation accorded to United Kingdom represented by Northern Ireland Assembly — Whether legislative situation in Northern Ireland tenable — Role of legislature and courts — Whether Northern Ireland abortion law incompatible with Article 8 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether declaration of incompatibility should be madeHuman rights — Rights of persons with disabilities — Treaties — United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006 — Northern Ireland abortion law prohibiting abortion in cases of serious malformation of the foetus — Foetus having potential to develop into child with disability in cases of serious foetal abnormality — Value of life with and without disability — Whether life having equal worth — United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities recommending States amend abortion laws so as to value equally the life of a person with disabilities — Whether Northern Ireland abortion law disproportionate in cases of serious foetal abnormality — Whether abortion law in Northern Ireland incompatible with Article 8 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether declaration of incompatibility should be made532Human rights — Right not to be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment — Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Rights of girls and women in Northern Ireland pregnant with foetuses with fatal abnormality or due to rape or incest — Article 3 absolute right — Effect on victim — Whether mothers continuing against their will with fatal foetal abnormality pregnancies or pregnancies due to rape or incest, or having to travel to England for an abortion, likely to suffer inhuman and degrading treatment — Whether any ill-treatment under Article 3 reaching minimum level of severity — Obligations owed by the State under Article 3 of European Convention — Vulnerability of women — Personal autonomy — Whether abortion law in Northern Ireland incompatible with Article 3 of European Convention — Whether declaration of incompatibility should be madeRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — Implementation — Interpretation — Effect in domestic law — International treaties to which United Kingdom a party — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Human Rights Act 1998 — United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 1979 — United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006 — Whether moral and political issues relevant — Balancing of rights — Northern Ireland abortion law interfering with right under Article 8 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether interference justified — Whether prescribed by law — Whether having legitimate aim — Whether necessary in democratic society — Whether proportionate — Relevance of moral and political views — Role of courts and Parliament in abortion debate — Whether pregnant women and girls subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment — Whether reaching minimum level of severity for breach of Article 3 of European Convention — Whether Northern Ireland abortion law incompatible with Articles 3 and 8 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 Convention — Whether declaration of incompatibility should be madeRelationship of international law and municipal law — Treaties — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Effect in domestic law — Abortion law in Northern Ireland — Sections 58 and 59 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 — Section 25(1) of the Criminal Justice Act (NI) 1945 — Right to respect for private and family life — Right not to be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment — Whether abortion law in 533Northern Ireland incompatible with Article 8 of European Convention — Balancing of rights — Whether abortion law justified — Whether moral and political values relevant — Margin of appreciation accorded to States by European Court of Human Rights — Whether abortion law in Northern Ireland incompatible with Articles 3 and 8 of European Convention — Whether declaration of incompatibility should be madeTreaties — Interpretation — Implementation — Application — Effect in domestic law — European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Interpreting European Convention in light of other international treaties to which United Kingdom a party — United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, 1979 — United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, 2006 — Relevance of unincorporated international treaties when applying European Convention via Human Rights Act 1998 — The law of the United Kingdom

Bringing People Down

2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 433-466
Author(s):  
John Vorhaus
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporal Punishment ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Relational Concept ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
As If

Under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, degrading treatment and punishment is absolutely prohibited. This paper examines the nature of and wrong inherent in treatment and punishment of this kind. Cases brought before the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) as amounting to degrading treatment and punishment under Article 3 include instances of interrogation, conditions of confinement, corporal punishment, strip searches, and a failure to provide adequate health care. The Court acknowledges the degradation inherent in imprisonment generally, and does not consider this to be in violation of Article 3, but it also identifies a threshold at which degradation is so severe as to render impermissible punishments that cross this threshold. I offer an account of the Court’s conception of impermissible degradation as a symbolic dignitary harm. The victims are treated as inferior, as if they do not possess the status owed to human beings, neither treated with dignity nor given the respect owed to dignity. Degradation is a relational concept: the victim is brought down in the eyes of others following treatment motivated by the intention to degrade, or treatment which has a degrading effect. This, so I will argue, is the best account of the concept of degradation as deployed by the Court when determining punishments as in violation of Article 3.

scholarly journals IMPLEMENTATION OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES IN HUMAN RIGHTS TO HEALTHCARE

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 ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights

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.

I respingimenti in mare di migranti alla luce della Convenzione europea dei diritti umani

2009 ◽  
pp. 591-607
Author(s):  
Alfredo Terrasi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
North African ◽  
European Court ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
Migration Flows ◽  
High Seas

- Italian authorities have recently undertaken a new policy to face migration flows from north african coasts. Since May, 6th 2009 Italian coastguard and financial police vessels have intercepted a large number of boats carrying migrants and returned them to Libya, in force of a readmission agreement between Italy and Libya. These operations, even if they take place on the high seas, have to comply with the European Convention for Human Rights, considering that the migrants fall under jurisdiction of Italian authorities within the meaning of art. 1 of the Convention. In particular, on the basis of the European Court of Human Rights case law, it can be argued that returning migrants to Libya, as long as they can be exposed to torture or inhuman and degrading treatment, is prohibited by art. 3. Moreover, art. 4 or the Fourth Protocol prohibits the collective expulsions of aliens. Notwithstanding, it's uncertain whether forcible return of aliens is consistent with the latter provision considering that the European Court requires that aliens ‘leave the country' in order to apply art. 4. In the end the praxis of Italian authorities is inconsistent with the Convention non-refoulement obligation deriving from art. 3.

14. Land Law and Human Rights

Land Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 593-629
Author(s):  
Chris Bevan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Land Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
Human Rights Discourse ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter examines the relationship between land law and human rights. From a distinctly land law perspective, the human rights discourse has given rise to much debate, which continues to fuel much academic commentary including recent examination of the availability of horizontal effect in McDonald v McDonald in the Supreme Court and in the European Court of Human Rights. The chapter focuses chiefly on the two most pertinent provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) for land law; namely Art. 1 of the First Protocol and Art. 8 and reflects on the, at times, difficult relationship between land law and human rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document