scholarly journals Access to Healthcare for Minors: An Ethical Analysis of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 1361
Author(s):  
Fabian-Alexander Tietze ◽  
Marcin Orzechowski ◽  
Marianne Nowak ◽  
Florian Steger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Access To Healthcare ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Healthcare Provision ◽  
Qualitative Thematic Analysis ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right

The right to non-discriminatory access to healthcare is anchored in the European Convention on Human Rights and other international treaties or guidelines. Since its ratification, the European Convention on Human Rights was made binding in all Member States of the Council of Europe and is interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Despite its legal recognition, discrimination in healthcare provision has repeatedly been an issue of medicoethical and political consideration. In this context, minors are particularly in danger of being deprived of this fundamental right. The aim of this study is to analyze the current state of the ECtHR jurisdiction on challenges in accessing healthcare for minor patients. We conducted a systematic search of judgments by the ECtHR using the keywords “healthcare” and “child”. We performed descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis. Our search resulted in n = 66 judgments, which were all screened. Access to healthcare for minors played a role in n = 21 judgments, which involved applications against n = 13 countries. We formed five, partially overlapping categories, which represent recurring themes regarding the research topic. These themes are governance failure (n = 11), the status of refugee, asylum seeker or migrant (n = 5), parental home (n = 5), maternity and birth (n = 4) and others (n = 2). The normative framework of the ECtHR’s jurisprudence illustrates intersections between social, legal and medicoethical aspects of minors’ discrimination in the healthcare system. It emphasizes the particular vulnerability of children, who require exceptional protection. Inadequate access to healthcare manifests itself in specific situations, such as in the context of migration or staying in public institutions. Healthcare professionals need to be sensitized for such discrimination mechanisms, as they are often at the forefront of encountering structural discrimination in the healthcare system.

scholarly journals The normative framework of the protection of personal data in the field of (bio)medicine

Temida ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 99-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasa Rajic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Personal Data ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Normative Framework ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Treatment Procedures ◽  
Biomedical Treatment

This paper discusses the normative framework of regulating the right to protection of personal data relating to biomedical treatment procedures of patients as human rights. The subjects of analysis are the European Convention, the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine and the relevant provisions of the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. The right to protection of personal data in the field of biomedicine is analyzed comparatively in terms of the content of this right and in terms of basis for limiting this right. The analysis is carried out to find answers to the question if the constitutional framework is consistent in terms of exercising this right, taking into account the constitutional provision on the direct application of human rights guaranteed by international treaties and other provisions that determine the status of international sources of law in our legal system.

Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy. Application No. 27765/09

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irini Papanicolopulu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
Maritime Search And Rescue ◽  
The Right

In a unanimous judgment in the case Hirsi Jamaa v. Italy, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (Court) held that Italy’s “push back” operations interdicting intending migrants and refugees at sea and returning them to Libya amounted to a violation of the prohibition of torture and other inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 of the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR or Convention), the prohibition of collective expulsions under Article 4 of Protocol 4 to the Convention, and the right to an effective remedy under Article 13 of the Convention. Hirsi Jamaa is the Court’s first judgment on the interception of migrants at sea and it addresses issues concerning the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the 1979 International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue, as well as the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.

scholarly journals Globalisation and Court Practice in Iceland: New Case Law of the Supreme Court in Relation to the EEA Agreement and European Convention on Human Rights

2021 ◽  
pp. 151-165
Author(s):  
Halldóra Thorsteinsdóttir
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
International Obligation ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Domestic Law ◽  
Court Practice

AbstractThis article examines the status of international treaties in Iceland law and how Icelandic court practice has developed in recent years in that area. With regard to the relationship between domestic law and international law, Iceland adheres to the principle of dualism. This means that international law does not come into force as Icelandic law unless implemented by the legislator. As a result, Icelandic Courts will not, in general, apply provisions of international treaties unless they have been incorporated into Icelandic statutory law. However, this does not mean that international obligation are not fulfilled, as Icelandic Courts will seek to interpret domestic law in line with international obligation to the extent possible. If an international treaty has been implemented into Icelandic law, its provisions are binding like other domestic law. With regard to the EEA Agreement, Icelandic Courts will seek to interpret national law in accordance with EEA obligations and follow the judgments of the EFTA Court if the Icelandic provision in question is open to such an interpretation. With regard to the European Convention on Human Rights, Icelandic Courts will even go a step further, as recent judgments show that Icelandic Courts tend to interpret the human rights provisions of the Icelandic Constitution in line with interpretation laid down by The European Court of Human Rights, even in cases where such an interpretation does not exactly fit within the direct wording of the provision in question. This is due to a special connection between the human rights chapter of the Icelandic Constitution and the Convention, as one of the legislators’ main goals when amending the Constitution in 1994 was to bring the human rights chapter more in line with the Convention.

scholarly journals Nagorno-Karabakh in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 106-123
Author(s):  
Aleksa Nikolic
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
The People ◽  
European Court ◽  
European System ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right

The paper analyses the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh from the point of view of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) regarding the violation of human rights of the warring parties directly related to the disputed territory. The European system of human rights protection is one of the greatest European achievements in the field of law, especially if we keep in mind that its judgments are binding on the signatories of the European Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms (ECHR), thus giving it suprajudicial power. Through the analysis of two cases, Sargsyan vs Azerbaijan and Chiragov and others vs Armenia, the Court addressed some very interesting issues that may encourage different interpretations of the European Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms (ECHR), but also directly affect the resolution of the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. In this regard, the analysis of the (non) existence of the right of the people of Nagorno- Karabakh to self-determination is especially interesting and significant. The author concludes that the ECtHR in its judgments has taken certain positions that may be of great importance in resolving the status of Nagorno-Karabakh before the international community and international organisations.

CIVIL AND LEGAL LIABILITY OF JUDGES

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaroslav Skoromnyy ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Pension System ◽  
Legal Liability ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Model Code ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

The article presents the conceptual foundations of bringing judges to civil and legal liability. It was found that the civil and legal liability of judges is one of the types of legal liability of judges. It is determined that the legislation of Ukraine provides for a clearly delineated list of the main cases (grounds) for which the state is liable for damages for damage caused to a legal entity and an individual by illegal actions of a judge as a result of the administration of justice. It has been proved that bringing judges to civil and legal liability, in particular on the basis of the right of recourse, provides for the payment of just compensation in accordance with the decision of the European Court of Human Rights. It was established that the bringing of judges to civil and legal liability in Ukraine is regulated by such legislative documents as the Constitution of Ukraine, the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Explanatory Note to the European Charter on the Status of Judges (Model Code), the Law of Ukraine «On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges», the Law of Ukraine «On the procedure for compensation for harm caused to a citizen by illegal actions of bodies carrying out operational-search activities, pre-trial investigation bodies, prosecutors and courts», Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the case on the constitutional submission of the Supreme Court of Ukraine regarding the compliance of the Constitution of Ukraine (constitutionality) of certain provisions of Article 2, paragraph two of clause II «Final and transitional provisions» of the Law of Ukraine «On measures to legislatively ensure the reform of the pension system», Article 138 of the Law of Ukraine «On the judicial system and the status of judges» (the case on changes in the conditions for the payment of pensions and monthly living known salaries of judges lagging behind in these), the Law of Ukraine «On the implementation of decisions and the application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights».

Standardy należytego uzasadnienia w świetle orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka

2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Reasoning ◽  
The Right

The core function of the judiciary is the administration of justice through delivering judgments and other decisions. The crucial role for its acceptance and legitimization by not only lawyers, but also individulas (parties) and the hole society plays judicial reasoning. It should reflect on judge’s independence within the exercise of his office and show also judicial self-restraint or activism. The axiology and the standards of proper judicial reasoning are anchored both in constitutional and supranational law and case-law. Polish Constitutional Tribunal derives a duty to give reasoning from the right to a fair trial – right to be heard and bring own submissions before the court (Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution), the right to appeal against judgments and decisions made at first stage (Article 78), the rule of two stages of the court proceedings (Article 176) and rule of law clause (Article 2), that comprises inter alia right to due process of law and the rule of legitimate expactation / the protection of trust (Vertrauensschutz). European Court of Human Rights derives this duty to give reasons from the guarantees of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of European Convention of Human Rights. In its case-law the ECtHR, taking into account the margin of appreciation concept, formulated a number of positive and negative requirements, that should be met in case of proper reasoning. The obligation for courts to give sufficient reasons for their decisions is also anchored in European Union law. European Court of Justice derives this duty from the right to fair trial enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Standards of the courts reasoning developed by Polish constitutional court an the European courts (ECJ and ECtHR) are in fact convergent and coherent. National judges should take them into consideration in every case, to legitimize its outcome and enhance justice delivery.

Introductory Note

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guido Raimondi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
European Public ◽  
Introductory Note ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

This article comments on four important judgments given by the European Court of Human Rights in 2016. Al-Dulimi v. Switzerland addresses the issue of how, in the context of sanctions regimes created by the UN Security Council, European states should reconcile their obligations under the UN Charter with their obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights to respect the fundamentals of European public order. Baka v. Hungary concerns the separation of powers and judicial independence, in particular the need for procedural safeguards to protect judges against unjustified removal from office and to protect their legitimate exercise of freedom of expression. Magyar Helsinki Bizottság v. Hungary is a judgment on the interpretation of the Convention, featuring a review of the “living instrument” approach. Avotiņš v. Latvia addresses the principle of mutual trust within the EU legal order and the right to a fair trial under Article 6 of the Convention.

Does the Injunction Gap Violate Implementers’ Fair Trial Rights Under the ECHR?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léon E Dijkman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Federal Supreme ◽  
Validity Of A Patent

Abstract Germany is one of few jurisdictions with a bifurcated patent system, under which infringement and validity of a patent are established in separate proceedings. Because validity proceedings normally take longer to conclude, it can occur that remedies for infringement are imposed before a decision on the patent’s validity is available. This phenomenon is colloquially known as the ‘injunction gap’ and has been the subject of increasing criticism over the past years. In this article, I examine the injunction gap from the perspective of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. I find that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights interpreting this provision supports criticism of the injunction gap, because imposing infringement remedies with potentially far-reaching consequences before the validity of a patent has been established by a court of law arguably violates defendants’ right to be heard. Such reliance on the patent office’s grant decision is no longer warranted in the light of contemporary invalidation rates. I conclude that the proliferation of the injunction gap should be curbed by an approach to a stay of proceedings which is in line with the test for stays as formulated by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court. Under this test, courts should stay infringement proceedings until the Federal Patent Court or the EPO’s Board of Appeal have ruled on the validity of a patent whenever it is more likely than not that it will be invalidated.

Lachiri v Belgium and Bans on Wearing Islamic Dress in the Courtroom: An Emerging Trend

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-53
Author(s):  
Kaushik Paul
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Public Spaces ◽  
Religious Liberty ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Islamic Dress

In recent years, the wearing of Islamic dress in public spaces and elsewhere has generated widespread controversy all over Europe. The wearing of the hijab and other Islamic veils has been the subject of adjudication before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on many occasions. The most recent case before the ECtHR as to the prohibition on wearing the hijab is Lachiri v Belgium. In this case, the ECtHR held that a prohibition on wearing the hijab in the courtroom constitutes an infringement of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which guarantees the right to freedom of religion or belief. From the perspective of religious freedom, the ruling of the Strasbourg Court in Lachiri is very significant for many reasons. The purpose of this comment is critically to analyse the ECtHR's decision in Lachiri from the standpoint of religious liberty.

Access to Court v State Immunity

2003 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Voyiakis
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
State Immunity ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

This comment discusses three recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the cases of McElhinney v Ireland, Al-Adsani v UK, and Fogarty v UK. All three applications concerned the dismissal by the courts of the respondent States of claims against a third State on the ground of that State's immunity from suit. They thus raised important questions about the relation the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention)—especially the right to a fair trial and access to court enshrined in Arcticle 6(1)—and the law of State immunity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document