scholarly journals Autoimmunity and Antibody Dependent COVID-19 Enhancement of SARS CoV-2 Vaccination: Moving from Nobel Prize to Prison Sentence.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mina Kelleni
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Nobel Prize ◽  
National Policy ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Autoimmune Myocarditis ◽  
The Public ◽  
Compulsory Vaccination ◽  
European Court ◽  
A Company

mRNA based and adenovirus vectored vaccines, types of nucleic acid-based vaccination, were first ever or first commercially ever approved for the public, respectively. However, these new types possess a potential risk to induce auto-immune diseases e.g. thrombocytopenia and some of these complications might also reason for some of the post vaccination sudden death reports e.g. autoimmune myocarditis and immune induced thromboembolism. Moreover, all SARS CoV-2 types of vaccines, depending on the spike protein immunogenicity, especially the conventional inactivated ones might increase the likelihood of COVID-19 severity upon re-infection through antibody dependent enhancement which might also reason for some of the serious adverse effects encountered with administration of convalescent plasma to COVID-19 patients. Importantly, we recommended the CDC to change its neutral recommendation and to advice against administration of nucleic acid-based vaccines to persons complaining from autoimmune diseases. Furthermore, we urge the FDA to consider a reevaluation of the emergency approval granted to Pfizer-BioNTech SARS CoV-2 mRNA (BNT162b2) vaccine as a company specific extra risk might be present wishing for an independent re-evaluation of the important Israeli pan-national experiment. On the other hand, we agree with the EMA decision to reevaluate the safety of Oxford/AstraZeneca (AZD1222) vaccine that ultimately led to a potential thrombosis labelling. Most importantly, a moral, legal, and sacred constitutional public right to know and decide basing on a personalized risk benefit ratio must be secured. Finally, we totally condemn, from a medical point of view, any national policy that necessitates these experimental vaccines and we also condemn the European Court of Human Rights shameful ruling that compulsory vaccination would not contravene human rights law and we suggest that the rapid race to develop and approve SARS CoV-2 vaccines with all its political and economic aspects might eventually end with a man-made Hades that might exceed COVID-19 in its dangers with a potential to replace Nobel Prize with an imprisonment sentence regardless of the signed agreements that will not, ever, secure impunity.

scholarly journals Compulsory Vaccination in a Fundamental Rights Perspective: Lessens from the ECtHR

ICL Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anja Krasser
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Public ◽  
Compulsory Vaccination ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
Master Thesis

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).

Muslim Reformists, Female Citizenship, and the Public Accommodation of Islam in Liberal Democracy

2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-35 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammad Fadel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Gender Equality ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Equality ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Gender Hierarchy ◽  
Normative Justification

AbstractThe European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), in a trilogy of cases involving Muslim claimants, has granted state parties to the European Convention on Human Rights a wide margin of appreciation with respect to the regulation of public manifestations of Islam. The ECHR has justified its decisions in these cases on the grounds that Islamic symbols, such as the ḥijāb, or Muslim commitments to the shari‘a — Islamic law — are inconsistent with the democratic order of Europe. This article raises the question of what kinds of commitments to gender equality and democratic decision-making are sufficient for a democratic order, and whether modernist Islamic teachings manifest a satisfactory normative commitment in this regard. It uses the arguments of two modern Muslim reformist scholars — Yūsuf al-Qaraḍāwī and ‘Abd al-Ḥalīm Abū Shuqqa — as evidence to argue that if the relevant degree of commitment to gender equality is understood from the perspective of political rather than comprehensive liberalism, doctrines such as those elaborated by these two religious scholars evidence sufficient commitment to the value of political equality between men and women. This makes less plausible the ECHR's arguments justifying a different treatment of Muslims on account of alleged Islamic commitments to gender hierarchy. It also argues that in light of Muslim modernist conceptions of the shari‘a, there is no normative justification to conclude that faithfulness to the shari‘a entails a categorical rejection of democracy as the ECHR suggested.

scholarly journals The right to peaceful enjoyment of property and the security measure of the forfeiture of cash in the jurisprudence of the Serbian Constitutional Court: Certain uncertainty

Pravni zapisi ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 620-644
Author(s):  
Tamás Korhecz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Cash Transfer ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Security Measure ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The right to peaceful enjoyment of property is a first-generation human right, protected by the international and domestic law of the highest rank. This is not an absolute right - the European standards of protecting property rights allow possible interferences prescribed by law. The interferences can be made in the public interest but only under the assumption that the proportionality between the public interest and property rights of individuals at stake is established. Forfeiture of undeclared cash the individuals are transferring across state borders, together with imposing fines for a misdemeanor, represent an interference with individuals' property rights. The EU Member States do not share an identical system of sanctions for this petty offense, but there is a tendency of unification related to the monitoring, registering, and sanctioning of undeclared, cross-border, individual cash transfer. The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights has established rather precise criteria for distinguishing permitted from unpermitted interferences in cases of undeclared cross-border cash transfers. The Serbian Constitutional Court has been faced with several constitutional complaints regarding alleged unconstitutionally of the imposed security measure amounting to the forfeiture of undeclared cash physically transferred across the state borders. The Constitutional Court has ruled inconsistently on the matter. Although it has regularly referred to the European Court of Human Rights' relevant decisions, it fails to be consistent in following the Strasbourg Court's rulings. In this article, the author has suggested that the legal certainty principle requires the Constitutional Court to consistently interpret the constitutional rights and be systematic in following Strasbourg. Only in this way, the Constitutional Court can help regular courts effectively to harmonize the interpretation and application of laws with the constitutional and international human rights standards regarding property rights.

The Electronic Surveillance of Public Assemblies

2011 ◽  
pp. 59-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haralambos Anthopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Electronic Surveillance ◽  
Combined Analysis ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
Political Views ◽  
Protection Legislation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Shed Light

The electronic surveillance of public assemblies has been an issue highly debated in the Greek public arena. The circumstances that brought this internationally contested topic in the public focus were the parliamentary introduction of Law 3625/2007 in Greece and the legislative enactment of an exemption from the data protection legislation for all police activities involving data processing during public assemblies. This paper will argue that the electronic surveillance of public assemblies affects both the privacy of political views (political privacy) and the activism (public anonymity) of a citizen. Along this line, the paper offers a combined analysis of the right to data protection [Art. 9A] and the right to free assembly [Art. 11] as acknowledged in the Greek Constitution (1975/86/01/08). As underlined, both rights constitute the basis for the protection of political privacy and public anonymity and preclude any legislatively posed limitations to their enjoyment. In the end, three key cases of the European Court of Human Rights shed light to the legitimacy of such a ‘panoptic’ surveillance of public assemblies.

Consumer responses to corporate offshoring practices

2015 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 698-712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Grappi ◽  
Simona Romani ◽  
Richard P Bagozzi
Keyword(s):  
Regulatory Focus ◽  
Regulatory Fit ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Consumer Evaluations ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Consumer Responses ◽  
The Public ◽  
Psychological Mechanisms ◽  
Psychology Theory ◽  
A Company

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate consumer responses to company communication of offshoring strategies and tries to discover which psychological mechanisms govern these responses. To do these, the authors examine offshoring strategy communication from the point of view of Regulatory Focus Theory. Design/methodology/approach – The authors tested the hypotheses in two different studies. Study 1 examines the associations between company offshoring motives and consumer’s prevention or promotion inferences about the company’s practices. Study 2 tests if and how the interaction effect between respondents’ self-regulatory focus and the company offshoring motive affects respondents’ attitude toward the offshoring company. Findings – The study demonstrated that each of three offshoring motives activates unique self-regulatory orientations (promotion or prevention focus) in consumers, and regulatory fit positively affects consumer attitudes toward the offshoring company. Practical implications – Results suggest how to communicate company offshoring decisions to consumers. By trying to instill a particular regulatory focus in the public with their communication tools, companies can create a better match in the public eye, gaining more positive consumer evaluations. Originality/value – This research shows the mechanisms through which consumers respond differently to specific offshoring motives communicated by a company. By building on psychology theory, the study gains insights into the consumer reactions to company offshoring and, to the knowledge, no research to date has examined these mechanisms.

scholarly journals A law-and-community approach to compensation for takings of property under the European Convention on Human Rights

Legal Studies ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 398-414
Author(s):  
Ting Xu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Market Value ◽  
Private Life ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Best Approximation ◽  
Community Approach ◽  
European Court

AbstractStudies of takings of property highlight the increasing penetration of state power into private life. Controversies regularly surround compensation provisions. Many academic analyses and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights have supported the proposition that market value offers the best approximation of just compensation. However, full market value compensation may not be guaranteed if the taking of property fulfils certain legitimate objectives of the ‘public interest’. To unpack the complexity surrounding compensation provisions under the European Convention on Human Rights, this paper adopts and develops a ‘law-and-community’ approach – an important dimension, not previously investigated in the study of takings of property – which sees ‘community’ as networks of social relations, and views law as not only grounded in community but also existing to regulate communal networks. This paper then identifies the limits of both Art 1, Protocol 1 of the ECHR and the current approaches to compensation in the light of this law-and-community approach. In so doing, the paper makes a distinctive contribution by offering a new socio-legal interpretation of controversies surrounding compensation for takings of property beyond the private/public divide and by proposing an alternative framework of engaging law and regulation in wider social life.

scholarly journals The United Kingdom’s Coronavirus Act, deprivations of liberty, and the right to liberty and security of the person

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Pugh
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Right ◽  
Article 5

Abstract In response to the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus pandemic the UK government has passed the Coronavirus Act 2020 (CA). Among other things, this act extends existing statutory powers to impose restrictions of liberty for public health purposes. The extension of such powers naturally raises concerns about whether their use will be compatible with human rights law. In particular, it is unclear whether their use will fall within the public heath exception to the Article 5 right to liberty and security of the person in the European Convention of Human Rights. In this paper, I outline key features of the CA, and briefly consider how the European Court of Human Rights has interpreted the public health exception to Article 5 rights. This analysis suggests two grounds on which restrictions of liberty enforced some under the CA might be vulnerable to claims of Article 5 rights violations. First, the absence of specified time limits on certain restrictions of liberty means that they may fail the requirement of legal certainty championed by the European Court in its interpretation of the public health exception. Second, the Coronavirus Act’s extension of powers to individuals lacking public health expertise may undermine the extent to which the act will ensure that deprivations of liberty are necessary and proportionate.

The Lautsi Case: A Comment from Italy

2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 221-230
Author(s):  
Fulvio Cortese
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Narrative ◽  
The Public ◽  
Religious Symbols ◽  
European Court ◽  
Public Status

The Lautsi case sets a very significant precedent in terms of the public status of religious symbols. As such, it has already been commented upon, either in a favourable or very critical light. This article attempts to reconstruct the distinct stages of the Lautsi case and highlights the most debatable aspects of the European Court of Human Rights’ ruling, and the potential developments in Italian national law. The author finally suggests that, in Italy, from the perspective of sources of law, the ending of the internal and national ‘narrative’ on religious symbols is still completely open.

The Principle of "Effectiveness" in the Recent Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights: Its Different Dimensions and Its Consistency with Public International Law – No Need for the Concept of Treaty Sui Generis

2010 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 245-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Rietiker
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Four Dimensions ◽  
European Court ◽  
Different Dimensions ◽  
International Legal System ◽  
Teleological Interpretation

AbstractThe recent past has shown an ever-growing fragmentation of the international legal system where lawyers and judges are facing more and more the phenomenon of the same legal question being discussed in different fora. This is particularly the case in the field of human rights that entails the dispersal of responsibilities for interpretation of numerous instruments among various different judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, of both universal and regional nature. In order to secure coherence and legal certainty in the system, it is important to respect a set of principles and rules of general international law, in particular Articles 31–33 of the 1969 Vienna Convention of the Law of Treaties (VCLT). The first goal of this article is to analyse whether the Court applies the rules of the VCLT to the interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Secondly, assuming that the VCLT fully applies, it will be analysed whether Article 31(1) VCLT is flexible enough to allow nevertheless some leeway for the development of specificities, especially as a result of the particular nature of the ECHR. Thirdly, it will be shown that the Court has indeed developed a set of specific methods of interpretation, aiming to render the rights enshrined in the ECHR effective. From the author's point of view, they can all be regarded as sub-forms (or partial aspects) of the teleological interpretation. He distinguishes between four dimensions of the principle of "effectiveness".

scholarly journals Konstytucyjne aspekty procesu karnego w działalności Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich

2021 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-211
Author(s):  
Stanisław Trociuk
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Public Prosecution ◽  
The Public ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Individual

The changes in the broadly conceived criminal procedure which were introduced in recent years refer to the problems which are crucial from the perspective of the protection of human rights, such as the scope of the authority of the services due to operational control which is conducted secretly, the model of the functioning of the public prosecution service or the unlawful acquiring of evidence in a criminal procedure. The evaluation of these changes, conducted by the Ombudsman from the point of view of the constitutional standards of the protection of the rights of the individual is not positive. The new regulations reduce the quality of these standards and they do not contain sufficient guarantees of protection against the arbitrariness of the activities engaged in these terms by the organs of public authority. This phenomenon imposes a particular duty on the courts – which hear criminal cases – to see that the final decision in a criminal case respects the universal standards of the protection of human rights.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document