Regulacje ograniczeń w zakresie noszenia symboli religijnych w ocenie Komitetu Praw Człowieka ONZ

2021 ◽  
Vol 3(164) ◽  
pp. 243-260
Author(s):  
Jacek Falski

The article provides a critical analysis of three individual notification opinions issued by the UN Human Rights Committee in July 2018 on the compatibility of existing regulations in States parties (France, Turkey) on bans on wearing religious symbols with the freedom to manifest religion guaranteed by Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Moreover, the text points out the dichotomy – in terms of content – of positions on this issue between the universal body and the regional reference body (the European Court of Human Rights) and also addresses such systemic issues as the problem of legal force of the Committee’s opinions, the lack of dialogue or even isolationism of international bodies ruling on human rights, or the dispute over the primacy of their decisions.

2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 859-894 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Lappin

AbstractThe right to vote is the most important political right in international human rights law. Framed within the broader right of political participation, it is the only right in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights not guaranteed as a universal human right but rather as a citizen's right. While limitations on the right to vote are permissible in respect of citizenship and age, residency-based restrictions are not explicitly provided. However, recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights endorse a view that voting rights may be conditioned on residency on the grounds of an individual's bond to their country-of-origin and the extent to which laws passed by that government would affect them. This article questions this proposition and explores whether disenfranchisement based solely on residency constitutes an unreasonable and discriminatory restriction to the essence of the right.


2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 283-296
Author(s):  
Yaël Ronen

AbstractThis article analyses the way in which the use of the rights to family life and to private life has evolved as a bar to the deportation of immigrants. The analysis focuses on the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) with respect to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which uses a rights-based framework; and of the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) with respect to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which uses a status-based framework. It notes the interaction between the two bodies and the attempt in each forum to modify its normative framework to follow the other's. The article further considers the implications of each normative framework for both integrated immigrants and other immigrants.


2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana Karadjova

AbstractThis article presents an overview of how those East European countries that are members of the Council of Europe have approached the problems of restitution as a means of reparation for past injustices. In doing so, attention will be paid to: the entitled persons and the extent of restitution; the underlying motivations vis-à-vis the form of reparation (restitution in kind or compensation), and attitudes towards minority groups and foreigners as part of the restitution process. Emphasis will also be given to the role played by international instruments (the ECHR and its future Protocol 12, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, various UN resolutions, etc), as well as by judicial institutions (the European Court of Human Rights, the UN Human Rights Committee) in the evolution of the restitution process in Eastern Europe in general, and regarding such issues as equality between foreigners and nationals as well as minority and religious groups and the elaboration of an international standard of restitution as reparation for abuses of human rights in particular. The bodies of the ECHR have managed to avoid problems related to restitution and reparations for past injustices by arguing that the right of restitution is not guaranteed by art.1 of Protocol 1 to the the ECHR. But the entry into force of a new Protocol 12 to the Convention will likely result in changes being made in this thought process, at least as regards the position of foreigners. If measures denying restitution, owing to the claimant's nationality, were taken after ratifi cation of Protocol 12, the way should be opened in the future to foreigners (in addition to procedures before the UN Human Rights Committee) to more effectively defend their rights relative to such restorative measures: notably, the possibility of seizing the Strasbourg Court with claims relating to justifi cation for "unequal treatment". The right to remedy the injustices committed to the victims of violations of human rights and international humanitarian law has appeared with increasing frequency on the agenda of the UN Commission on Human Rights. Furthermore, in its recent case law, the UN Human Rights Committee has evidenced a concern over several questions relating to the respect of possessions; it has already opted for the proposition that any discrimination on the basis of nationality in restitution legislation can be deemed to be a violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Lastly, after ratifi cation of Protocol 12, we can expect a link to be forged between the vision of the UN Commission on Human Rights and that of the European Court of Human Rights that may—in the future—lead to the elaboration of a common international mechanism regulating restitution as a means for the reparation of abuses of human rights.


2021 ◽  
Vol 71 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-49
Author(s):  
Vasilka Sancin ◽  

The article first briefly discusses the negative impact of corruption on the enjoyment of human rights, particularly civil and political rights, and States parties’ obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to then focus on a critical analysis of the UN Human Rights Committee’s practice (HRC), demonstrating that corruption is no longer only occasionally mentioned within differently focused substantive paragraphs of concluding observations, but features prominently, often as a standalone separate concern, followed by specific and detailed recommendations. Such development signals the recognition by the HRC of important interlinkages between corruption and serious effects on a number of ICCPR’s rights. The conclusion offers some thoughts on possible evolution on the issue within the HRC, with the objective of ensuring full realisation and enjoyment of civil and political human rights.


Author(s):  
Grischa Merkel

This chapter focuses on issues surrounding the pretrial detention and civil detention of dangerous individuals. It first considers the legal principles of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and their interpretations by the European Court of Human Rights before discussing international regulations on pretrial detention such as those provided by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It then examines two major decisions made by the European Court of Human Rights concerning the question of which actions can be deemed a deprivation of liberty. It also looks at pretrial detention based on reasonable suspicion of the commission of a crime and goes on to explain the principle of proportionality underpinning the civil detention of dangerous individuals. The chapter concludes with an analysis of three different ways legal procedures can be affected by charges of terrorism.


2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 151-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeroen Temperman

This article ventures into the contentious question of whether the denial of historical atrocities is per se removed from the protection of freedom of expression and the related question if states may under international human rights law proactively combat, through criminal legislation (‘memory laws’), such types of extreme speech. In so doing, the article compares and contrasts approaches employed by the un Human Rights Committee that monitors the un International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights with that of the European Court of Human Rights, regional watchdog of the European Convention on Human Rights. It is argued that both approaches are shifting—though not quite in converging directions. The article makes a case for a contextual rather than exclusively content-based approach. An approach in which the question of ‘likelihood of harm being done to the targeted group’ is guiding, best resonates with the necessity principle.


Author(s):  
Tadeusz Jasudowicz

Abstract The subject of the study is the issue defined in international documents by the term “threat to the life of the nation” as a preliminary condition for departing from obligations in the field of human rights. This premise was adopted both in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as in similar regulations for individual continents, including the European Convention on Human Rights. However, on a practical basis, this issue has raised and continues to raise multiple interpretation doubts. In the presented considerations, various aspects of this problem are presented in the light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. On the basis of these, it can be assumed that one cannot identify the category of the nation with the categories of the state and//or the population, since each of these categories has its due autonomy; while on the other hand, they accompany, coexist and remain in mutual relations and interaction. Hence, in international norms, both the treaty provisions and the treaty bodies in their rulings consistently confirm “the life of the nation” as the fundamental protected value, which does not prevent them from associating this value with values important for the state as such and for the population/society. The classic model of this approach has already been established by the ECtHR in the Lawless case, where the Court described a derogation situation as “an exceptional crisis or emergency situation that affects the entire population and poses a threat to the organized life of the community that comprises the state


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 517-536
Author(s):  
Christophe Deprez

Abstract This article seeks to provide a comparative and up-to-date overview of the applicable rules and relevant practice of the European Court of Human Rights and of the United Nations Human Rights Committee on forum duplication in international human rights litigation. While specific inadmissibility clauses have been included in both the European Convention on Human Rights and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights with a view to preventing multiple human rights petitions in relation to the same matter, their respective scopes differ. Moreover, the applicable normative framework has led to important—and diverging—judicial developments in Strasbourg and in Geneva, which may be of great significance in human rights practice and therefore deserve to be thoroughly addressed.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tzehainesh Teklè

Abstract This article examines the role played by International Labour Standards (ILS) of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) and the pronouncements of the ILO supervisory bodies in the development of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR)’s jurisprudence by focussing on the ECtHR’s case law on discrimination. This analysis is conducted against the background of the role that the ECtHR has been playing in making the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) an instrument that protects not only civil and political rights but also social and economic rights, and its consideration of the ECHR as a ‘living’ document. This study concludes with a reflection on the benefits of the ECtHR’s use of ILS and the work of the ILO supervisory bodies and challenges ahead.


Author(s):  
Yogesh Tyagi

The golden jubilee of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) coincides with the emergence of Asia as a centre of global attention. However, greater attention to Asia has been accompanied by some scepticism over its attitude towards human rights. The chapter provides an overall assessment of the impact of the ICCPR on the major Asian States, with an analysis of the factors affecting such influence. The chapter considers the involvement in, observance of, and compliance with the provisions of the ICCPR by these States. It further delves into the academic and judicial discourse on the ICCPR within these States, recording the domestic disposition towards judgments of foreign courts, the output of the Human Rights Committee, and the work of other international human rights bodies. It makes suggestions for developing mechanisms to improve the effectiveness of the ICCPR and for creating databases to perform further research in the area.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document