scholarly journals Mediation and Court in Ukraine: Perspectives on Interaction and Mutual Understanding

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 181-190

In this note, the authors identify some problems concerning the introduction of mediation in Ukraine in terms of its use in the consideration and resolution of court cases. Despite the lack of clear legal regulation for mediation, courts in Ukraine still try to use this mechanism of pre-trial dispute resolution. Particular attention is paid to the law enforcement activities of courts in criminal and administrative cases, in which courts try to equate the conciliation procedure with the mediation procedure. These approaches clearly follow from the Resolutions and Recommendations of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe and the settled case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) since, back in 1975, the ECtHR in its decision Golder v. The United Kingdom ruled that it is unlikely that the rule of law can be imagined without access to justice. However, the presumption that the courts are the main institution for resolving disputes continues to be undermined by the proliferation of alternative forms of dispute resolution, both agreement-based and judicial.

ICL Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-69
Author(s):  
Eszter Polgári

AbstractThe present article maps the explicit references to the rule of law in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR by examining the judgments of the Grand Chamber and the Plenary Court. On the basis of the structured analysis it seeks to identify the constitutive elements of the Court’s rule of law concept and contrast it with the author’s working definition and the position of other Council of Europe organs. The review of the case-law indicates that the Court primarily associates the rule of law with access to court, judicial safeguards, legality and democracy, and it follows a moderately thick definition of the concept including formal, procedural and some substantive elements. The rule of law references are predominantly ancillary arguments giving weight to other Convention-based considerations and it is not applied as a self-standing standard.


ICL Journal ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eszter Polgári

AbstractThe present article maps the explicit references to the rule of law in the jurisprudence of the ECtHR by examining the judgments of the Grand Chamber and the Plenary Court. On the basis of the structured analysis it seeks to identify the constitutive elements of the Court’s rule of law concept and contrast it with the author’s working definition and the position of other Council of Europe organs. The review of the case-law indicates that the Court primarily associates the rule of law with access to court, judicial safeguards, legality and democracy, and it follows a moderately thick definition of the concept including formal, procedural and some substantive elements. The rule of law references are predominantly ancillary arguments giving weight to other Convention-based considerations and it is not applied as a self-standing standard.


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 33-51
Author(s):  
Agno Andrijauskaito

The principle of legality permeates the entire legal system based on the rule of law. It is especially well-pronounced in criminal law. However, what are its content, scope and implications when it comes to prescribing and punishing for offences which are supposedly less reprehensible, namely – administrative offences? How precisely should they or the sanctions that they stipulate be defined in legal provisions? Furthermore, is there any room for interpretation while imposing sanctions by public bodies? This article seeks to delve into these vexed questions by examining the relationship between the principle of legality and administrative punishment within the framework of the Council of Europe ('CoE') and the implications stemming therefrom. This will be done by dissecting the rationale and notion of this principle in the normative sources of the CoE with a special emphasis on Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights and its (autonomous) application in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights as well as by identifying the shortcomings of the current perception of the legality principle in the context of administrative punishment.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuliya Samovich

The manual is devoted to making individual complaints to the European Court of human rights: peculiarities of realization of the right to appeal, conditions of admissibility and the judicial procedure of the European Court of Human Rights. The author analyses some “autonomous concepts” used in the court's case law and touches upon the possibility of limiting the right to judicial protection. The article deals with the formation and development of the individual's rights to international judicial protection, as well as the protection of human rights in universal quasi-judicial international bodies and regional judicial institutions of the European Union and the Organization of American States. This publication includes a material containing an analysis of recent changes in the legal regulation of the Institute of individual complaints. The manual is recommended for students of educational organizations of higher education, studying in the areas of bachelor's and master's degree “Jurisprudence”.


Author(s):  
Rafael Bustos Gisbert

El artículo examina los documentos elaborados sobre independencia judicial por distintos órganos del Consejo de Europa. Tiene en cuenta la diferente aproximación en los mismos antes y después de la crisis del Estado de Derecho en algunos de los Estados europeos a partir de 2010. Tras resumir los estándares básicos elaborados en tales textos, se estudia su influencia en el Consejo de Europa y en la UE. En el primer sentido se examina su presencia en la jurisprudencia del TEDH. Respecto a la UE se examina el modo en que ha condicionado la labor de la Comisión en la supervisión del respeto al Estado de Derecho por los Estados miembros desde que comenzara a usarlos para evaluar las candidaturas de los países del Este a ingresar en la UE a finales del pasado siglo, hasta su incorporación al Informe sobre el Estado de Derecho en la UE aprobado en octubre de 2020.This essay focuses on the documents on judicial independence drafted by Council of Europe bodies. It takes into account its diverse approaches before and after the rule of Law backsliding in some European States since 2010. The basic standards elaborated are summarized. Its influence is addressed both at the Council of Europe and at the European Unión. In the first sense it examines the influence of this soft law in the European Court of Human Rights case law. Secondly it focuses in the way it has conditioned the European Commission task of monitoring the effectiveness of rule of law in EU member states. This influence began when they were used to evaluate the candidatures of Eastern European countries to join the EU at the end of the last century but it has kept inspiring the Commision’s activities until the Report on Rule of Law issued in October 2010.


Author(s):  
Pavlo Parkhomenko

The entry of a child into the sphere of justice, regardless of its status, requires the creation of such conditions that would minimize the possibility of the impact of negative factors in the process of administering justice on the child himself. In this regard, one of the effective and important elements in the child-friendly justice system may be the organization of a special courtroom, which would be adapted to hear cases involving a child, which is not widely used in national practice and does not have the appropriate legal regulation in general. In addition, to date, there are no studies that would reflect the problems of organizing a courtroom, in which it is possible to try different categories of cases with the participation of the child. The article attempts to conduct a theoretical and legal study of existing international standards and national legal regulation of the organization of child-friendly courtrooms, identifying the basic elements for its creation, through which it is possible to formulate basic approaches to the administration of child-friendly justice. The author stressed that international standards refer to the components of child-friendly justice, including the issue of creating the most comfortable conditions for the child in the courtroom and directly during the hearing. To substantiate the conclusions, we analyzed the national case law and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, which demonstrates cases of violation of children's rights by not creating appropriate conditions for the trial of children, and emphasizes the importance of the situation in which the trial took place. from litigation involving adults. Positive practices of organization of special courtrooms in some courts of Ukraine are given. Based on the analysis, it was found that the issue of arranging a courtroom friendly to children has no legislative and departmental regulations, in connection with which proposed ways to address the legislative gap in this direction and guidelines for organizing a special courtroom, which is positively assessed. Рrovided children who were invited to court and who had the opportunity to compare the general courtroom and the special. Keywords: international standards, children's rights, child-friendly justice, child interview, courtroom.


2009 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 353-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Hilson

Abstract The aim of this chapter is to provide an initial attempt at analysis of the place of risk within the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) and, where appropriate, the Commission, focusing on the related issues of public concern and perception of risk and how the ECHR dispute bodies have addressed these. It will argue that, for quite some time, the Court has tended to adopt a particular, liberal conception of risk in which it stresses the right of applicants to be provided with information on risk to enable them to make effective choices. Historically, where public concerns in relation to particular risks are greater than those of scientific experts—nuclear radiation being the prime example in the case law—the Court has adopted a particularly restrictive approach, stressing the need for risk to be ‘imminent’ in order to engage the relevant Convention protections. However, more recently, there have been emerging but as yet still rather undeveloped signs of the Court adopting a more sensitive approach to risk. One possible explanation for this lies in the Court’s growing awareness of and reference to the Aarhus Convention. What we have yet to see—because there has not yet been a recent, post-Aarhus example involving such facts—is a case where no imminent risk is evident. Nevertheless, the chapter concludes that the Court’s old-style approach to public concern in such cases, in which it rode roughshod over rights to judicial review, is out of line with the third, access to justice limb of Aarhus.


Author(s):  
Nadja Braun Binder ◽  
Ardita Driza Maurer

This chapter is dedicated to exploring the impact on Swiss administrative law of the pan-European general principles of good administration developed within the framework of the Council of Europe (CoE). The chapter claims that the standards stemming from the European Convention on Human Rights and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights have been adopted in an exemplary way by Swiss authorities. The influence was especially strong in the 1980s and 1990s. The same cannot be said regarding other documents of the CoE, whose impact remains disparate because many aspects of the pan-European general principles of good administration were already part of the national written law. The chapter concludes that despite the exemplary integration of CoE instruments heated debates on the content of these instruments are not excluded from Switzerland.


Author(s):  
Daniela Thurnherr

This chapter discusses the reception of the ECHR in Austria and Switzerland. Topics covered include the accession and ratification of the ECHR in both countries, the status of the ECHR in national law, an overview of the activity of the European Court of Human Rights, and the ECtHR's case law and its effects on the national legal order. Although both countries joined the ECHR at a relatively early stage, this starting position led to different outcomes. The main reason is because the common denominators of neutrality and federalism in these two countries are actually rather small: as Austria follows a very different concept of neutrality, it did not face any (political) difficulties before and during the ratification process. Switzerland, on the other hand, was very reluctant to join the Council of Europe and careful to avoid any concessions with regard to neutrality.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document