scholarly journals Friendly settlement of dispute in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 20-24
Author(s):  
Vitaliy Zavhorodnii ◽  
Oleh Zhravel
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
State Party ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Unilateral Declaration ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Government ◽  
Settlement Of Disputes ◽  
Settlement Of Dispute

The existing approaches of lawyers to understanding the characteristics, types and structure of decisions of the Court of Justice of the Council of Europe, adopted by it on the basis of amicable settlement of disputes and substantiation on this basis of the author's concept of phenomena declaration of amicable settlement and unilateral declaration of the Government. The author analyzes and critically comprehends the doctrinal conclusions and provisions of national legislation on the need to separate the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, which, along with the rulings of the Court of Justice, are subject to mandatory implementation by the State party to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

scholarly journals Kosovo’s Quest for Council of Europe Membership

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 255-273
Author(s):  
Kushtrim Istrefi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Development Bank ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Government ◽  
Venice Commission ◽  
Direct Applicability

In 2014, Kosovo became a member of two Council of Europe (CoE) partial agreements: on the Development Bank and on the European Commission for Democracy through Law (the Venice Commission). More recently, the Government of Kosovo expressed an interest in joining the CoE. This article examines, in the context of Kosovo’s contested statehood, the conditions and procedure for Kosovo’s possible admission to the CoE and describes, in the form of an early warning, the key legal and policy issues that could arise in this process. Insofar as membership criteria are concerned, the article examines Kosovo’s ability to exercise jurisdiction over its territory. In this regard, the case of Azemi v. Serbia before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or the Strasbourg Court) and the EU-facilitated agreements between Belgrade and Pristina are considered. In addition, the article argues that that the direct applicability of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) and the ECtHR’s case law in Kosovo are evidence of Kosovo’s commitment to fulfilling one of the essential membership criteria. Regarding Kosovo’s prospects for admission, the article submits that the recognition of Kosovo by more than two-thirds of the Council’s member states is an indicator that, in principle, Kosovo could ensure the votes necessary for admission. However, it also highlights the specific challenges Kosovo may encounter in its membership path due to complex admission procedures within the CoE Committee of Ministers and the composition of the members of the CoE Parliamentary Assembly (PACE).

It Takes a Village to Implement a Judgment: Creating a Forum for Multi-Stakeholder Involvement in the Czech Republic

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 193-198
Author(s):  
Vít Alexander Schorm
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Czech Republic ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
European Court ◽  
National Implementation ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Government ◽  
Multi Stakeholder

Abstract In this practice note, the Government Agent of the Czech Republic before the European Court of Human Rights and other international bodies for the protection of human rights reflects on national implementation, with the help of selected examples.

Between Informal Dialogue and Official Criticism

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 409-420
Author(s):  
Anna Podolska
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Mutual Recognition ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Proceedings

Abstract There are various forms of jurisdictional dialogue. In addition to drawing from the case law of another court or seeking direct assistance of such another court in passing the judgment, we can notice in practice situations when by issuing a verdict the courts are communicating with each other. The rulings of the Bundesverfassungsgericht, the Court of Justice of the European Union, and the European Court of Human Rights regarding the free movement of judgments in the European Union and protection of fundamental rights are the example of such activities. Each of these bodies was interpreting separately the extent to which the mechanisms of recognising and executing the judgments may interfere with the level of protection of fundamental rights. A common conclusion concerns assigning the priority to protection of fundamental rights, while individual bodies were determining differently the standards of such protection. The analysed judgments can be construed as a communication between these bodies. Although no direct discussion takes place between these courts, this is still a form of interaction which affects the development of the case law and understanding of the boundaries of mutual recognition of judgments and protection of human rights within judicial proceedings.

scholarly journals Case Report on C-411/10, N.S. and C-493/10, M.E. and Others, 21 December 2011

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie Lieven
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Report ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Member States ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Common European Asylum System ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The European Court of Justice clarified through this judgment the way in which the overloading of a Member States’ asylum system affects the EU arrangements for determining the Member State responsible for asylum applications lodged in the EU and thereby drastically reduced the possibility granted to Member States to transfer asylum applicants. The Member States now have an obligation to verify that no serious risk of violation of the Charter rights of the applicant exits in the receiving country before being allowed to transfer the person. The practical consequences of this ruling are still uncertain but further cooperation between Member States should be able to enhance the level of protection of human rights within the Common European Asylum System.

scholarly journals Specyfika odpowiedzialności za naruszenia Europejskiej Konwencji Praw Człowieka związane z działalnością nieuznawanych reżimów – analiza orzecznictwa

2020 ◽  
pp. 27-66
Author(s):  
Szymon Zaręba
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
International Courts ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
International Responsibility

The aim of the article is to compare the way in which the issue of responsibility for violations related to the acts of unrecognized authorities claiming to be States is treated by the European Court of Human Rights and other international courts, particularly the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The article considers in detail the relations between jurisdiction and responsibility, responsibility of parent States (including the concept of “positive obligations”) and responsibility of States which provide assistance to unrecognized regimes (with emphasis put on the concept of “effective control”). The results of the study indicate that the jurisprudence of the European Court differs in several important aspects from decisions of other international courts. These differences, while undoubtedly enhancing the protection of human rights in Europe, contribute to the process of fragmentation of the law of international responsibility.

scholarly journals Supervision of the execution of The European Court of Human Rights’ case law

2021 ◽  
pp. 33-36
Author(s):  
Corina Siman ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Political ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
European System ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Executive Body

The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms empowers the decision-making and executive body of the Council of Europe, id est the Committee of Ministers, to supervise the execution of the European Court of Human Rights’ case law. The mechanism thus established possesses a certain specificity, which is inherent to the European system of protection of fundamental rights. Therefore, both the political nature of the Committee of Ministers and the elements that form the process of monitoring the implementation of the content of the Strasbourg Court’s judgments and decisions are of interest.

scholarly journals The Phenomena of Fragmentation in the Legal Relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viktoriya Kuzma
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Continent ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law

This article presents the current issues in the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. It is pointed out that the division of international law into branches and institutions, in order to ensure the effective legal regulation of new spheres of relations, led to the emergence of autonomous legal regimes, even within one region, namely on the European continent. To date, these include European Union law and Council of Europe law. It is emphasized the features of the established legal relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union at the present stage. It is determined that, along with close cooperation between regional organizations, there is a phenomenon of fragmentation, which is accompanied by the creation of two legal regimes within the same regional subsystem, proliferation of the international legal norms, institutions, spheres and conflicts of jurisdiction between the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. It is revealed that some aspects of fragmentation can be observed from the moment of establishing relations between the Council of Europe and the European Union, up to the modern dynamics of the functioning of the system of law of international organizations, the law of international treaties, law of human rights. Areas and types of fragmentation in relations between international intergovernmental organizations of the European continent are distinguished. One way to overcome the consequences of fragmentation in the field of human rights is highlighted, namely through the accession of the European Union to the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950. Considerable attention has also been paid to defragmentation, which is partly reflected in the participation of the European Union in the Council of Europe’s conventions by the applying «disconnection clause». It is determined that the legal relations established between an international intergovernmental organization of the traditional type and the integration association sui generis, the CoE and the EU, but with the presence of phenomenon of fragmentation in a close strategic partnership, do not diminish their joint contribution into the development of the law of international organizations and contemporary international law in general. Key words: defragmentation; European Union; European Court of Human Rights; Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950; conflict of jurisdictions; «disconnection clause»; Council of Europe; Court of Justice of the European Union; fragmentation; sui generis.

scholarly journals PREVENTION OF TORTURE ON THE TEMPORARILY OCCUPIED TERRITORIES OF UKRAINE

2021 ◽  
pp. 142-147
Author(s):  
Kh. Yamelska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Effective Means ◽  
The State ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Occupied Territories ◽  
The Government ◽  
Legal Pressure ◽  
The Impact

The article reveals the content of armed aggression and the legal status of the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine. Russia's aggression against Ukraine is considered in historical retrospect. Cases of torture and other ill-treatment on the temporarily occupied territories have been demonstrated in specific cases. The article examines the state of human rights on the temporarily occupied territories, namely the prevention of torture and other ill-treatment. Ways to prevent torture and ill-treatment in order to respect human rights and maintain the rule of law have been identified. The author determined that system of counteraction to aggression of Russia, which consists the political, legal and economic means, includes the prevention of torture and ill-treatment.The author notes that the adoption of UN GA resolutions and other documents of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe are new elements of increasing legal pressure on Russia. The submission of interstate applications by the Government of Ukraine to the European Court of Human Rights against the Russian Federation is one of the effective means of preventing torture. The article reveals the impact of expert and advocacy activities of non-governmental human rights organizations on the prevention of torture and the state of human rights on the temporarily occupied territories. It is noted that maintaining contacts with the citizens of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, constant informing, as well as obtaining information by the Ukrainian side on the state of human rights in the temporarily occupied territory provides an opportunity to partially prevent such violations and allow future reintegration of these territories. Keywords: prevention of torture, temporarily occupied territories, armed aggression, observance of human rights.

CONCERNING TO THE LEGAL NATURE AND IMPORTANCE OF THE ADVISORY OPINIONS OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Artem Ivanov ◽  
◽  
Eliza Shyhapova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Primary Sources ◽  
Advisory Opinion ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
General Importance ◽  
European Court ◽  
Legal Nature ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Advisory Opinions

This article is devoted to clarify the significance of the advisory opinions of the European Court of Human Rights as a recently improved institution. Thus, according to Article 1 of Protocol No. 16 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the highest judicial institutions of the High Contracting Party, as defined in accordance with Art. 10 may apply to the Court for advisory opinions on matters of principle concerning the interpretation or application of the rights and freedoms defined by the Convention or its protocols. Considering the fact that only two advisory opinions on the appeal of the member states of the Council of Europe have been published on the official website of the court, this topic is a new subject for research and requires a systematic study. Allowing states to seek advisory opinions was driven by the need to ease the burden on the European Court of Human Rights. However, given the novelty of the improved institute, this statement is still controversial. The article offers its own conclusions regarding the significance of the advisory opinions in the activities of the European Court, provides a view on the legal nature of this legal institution in the internal legal order of Ukraine. This was achieved by defining the essence of such a mechanism, analyzing primary sources from the official website of the court, statistical data on the functioning of the institution, and generalizing national legislation to determine the legal nature. Thus, although Ukraine has ratified Protocol No. 16, however, the legal status of such advisory opinions has not been determined. In this connection, it is proposed to amend a number of legislative acts, in particular, to article 17 of the Law of Ukraine "On the implementation and application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights", which should be supplemented with the rule on the legal force of the advisory opinion of the European Court of Human Rights. According to the general importance of such an institution, it seems reasonable to hope for a decrease in the number of decisions that would contradict the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, and, accordingly, a decrease in the grounds for filing applications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document