scholarly journals Human Rights beyond Ideal Morality: The ECHR and Political Judgment

Laws ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 77
Author(s):  
Dimitrios Tsarapatsanis

The aim of the article is to propose and defend a distinctively political reading of the European Convention of Human Rights. Drawing on a range of different sources, my core claim is that realistically construed considerations of political legitimacy, stemming from the institutional context within which ECtHR judges operate, can explain and justify a morally non-ideal understanding of Convention rights on the part of the Court. I call the kind of non-ideal reading of the ECHR that I defend ‘political’ because it results from distinctive concerns regarding the Court’s legitimacy in a wider context marked by the circumstances of politics, broadly understood. These concerns depend on apprehending the ECHR as a distinctive institutional-cum-legal regime or system whose stability has political underpinnings. Tackling them requires resorting to some form of political judgment aimed at working out how various normative parameters, including legitimacy and stability, interact with a morally ideal (or ‘first-best’) understanding of any given ECHR right.

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-71
Author(s):  
Georgeta Valeria Georgeta Valeria

This article, entitled Brief Considerations Regarding the Juridical Protection of PrivateLife in the Regulation of the New Romanian civil Code, examines the new legal regime of howthe private life of the person is respected, in connection to the inseparable link between the rightto a private life, lato sensu, and its four intrinsic rights – the right to freedom of speech, the rightof the person to dignity, the right to a private life and image rights.The regulation was imperatively necessary, both to complete the framework of the valuesguaranteed by art. 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights, but also to establish aninterference between the concept of private life and personal privacy, in the context of theexcessive broadcasting of peoples’ private lives.


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (6) ◽  
pp. 338-355
Author(s):  
Sead Bandžović ◽  

The three key conditions for the existence of a state, according to the theory of state and law, are geographical territory, population and organized political power in that area. However, during the twentieth century in some African and Asian countries, due to various political, economic and other factors, problems began to appear in performance of their basic functions: ensuring public order and peace, providing health services, education. Modern science has introduced the term failed states to describe such countries. This scientific phenomenon has been the subject of numerous researches, and international organizations have been publishing annual indices of fragile, failed or unsuccessful world states for years. The first index of its kind was created in 2005 by the American non-profit organization The Fund for Peace in cooperation with the magazine Foreign Policy, which initially included 76 countries. The original term failed state was considered politically extremely incorrect, even when it referred to countries like South Sudan or Somalia, noting that such a term originated in the political terminology of developed countries by which all other countries at a lower level of development were considered to be failed ones. Therefore, in 2014, a new notion of a fragile state was created, and accordingly the existing index was renamed the Fragile State Index (FSI). This parameter determines the degree of fragility for each country on an annual basis, assessing four basic indicators: cohesion (functionality of the state apparatus), economic (overall economic situation), political (legitimacy of the state, availability of public services, respect for human rights and freedoms) and social (demographic structure of the community, number of displaced persons and refugees, external interventions). Based on the values of these indicators, countries are positioned in four groups: sustainable, stable, endangered and alarming. The paper also discusses Bosnia and Herzegovina as a potentially fragile state. Although it enjoys sovereignty and political independence, the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement still provides for the strong participation of the international community in the performance of its basic state functions. Examples include the presence of international military and police forces from the early post-war years to the present (EUFOR), with a special emphasis on the position of High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina. The peace agreement gave him the status of his supreme interpreter, as well as the well-known Bonn powers that he used on several occasions to remove Bosnian political officials and the imposition of laws (Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Law on the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Law on the Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina) due to the inability of domestic parliamentary bodies to pass them independently. In addition to the extremely complicated constitutional structure, the functioning of Bosnia and Herzegovina is hampered by the inability to reach an agreement between political representatives on key issues in the country. In the first place, these are much-needed changes to the constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina that would in the future allow members of minorities (Jews and Roma) to elect their own representatives in the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina. In this regard, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in 2009 in the case of Sejdić-Finci assessed that the impossibility of minority participation in political decision-making is a gross violation of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Numerous international organizations, primarily Human Rights Watch, have been warning for years about other problems in the country: national segregation of children under two schools under one roof, numerous attacks on Bosniak returnees in Republic of Srpska without adequate sanctions and extreme slowness in war crimes proceedings and the administration of transitional justice with the emergence of increasingly frequent denials of war crimes and victims. Although more than 25 years have passed since the end of the war, the participation of the international factor is still noticeable, and in some cases necessary.


wanted total equality among its pupils in all areas including dress. Therefore, the ‘no turban rule’ was a necessary aspect of uniform, discipline and equality. The school insisted that it was non-sectarian yet the headmaster also maintained that the school wished to project ‘a Christian image’. Therefore, by implication suggesting that the turban was also said to be a challenge to the Christian faith. The headmaster also objected because it was a manifestation of the appellant’s ethnic origins. Lord Fraser found that the school could not justify the condition on grounds other than on ethnic origin and that this was illegal under the Act. In addition, Lord Fraser stated that Lord Denning’s criticism of the CRE was completely unjustified. This brief discussion of one case reveals the different approaches to statutory interpretation. Context and perhaps judicial attitudes dictate the rules used. Rules of interpretations are not referred to. Perhaps the best indicator of what is going on is a careful consideration of what is being said and what ‘styles’ of interpretation seem represented by the tone of the judgment. Each judge does indeed have a personal style. Interpretational problems can never be solved by the neat application of interpretational rules, even worse perhaps the rules do little or nothing to solve problems. At the risk of heresy, perhaps all that purported interpretational rules do is simply to justify solutions. As mentioned above, there is rarely one right answer, only a range of more plausible and less plausible outcomes, varying according to interpretational styles. Judges use their creativity in working out a solution according to criteria which must be rational either in reality or in argument. They invariably go beyond the text when constructing answers. Lord Denning, for example, moved from dictionary definitions to subjective assertion. Often, judges say no more than ‘this is the answer because I say so’. Judges, as previously noted, can be classified as formalists or contextualists. It is possible to begin to guess as to which rules the judges think they are using. It is good also to accept that it is not always possible to understand what they are arguing, and to realise that, at times, judges themselves are wrong and not themselves too sure of the appropriate outcome. This is what makes comprehension of the methods of statutory interpretation, and the use of precedents, so difficult. It is essential to realise the limits of a supposed scientific approach and the limitless possibilities that open up when the illogical bridges from one set of rationale to the next are located and the power of language appreciated. As the judges engage more with the European dimensions of interpretation they are being forced to engage more often with the teleological approach used in European cases. As discussed in Chapter 5, the Human Rights Act 1998 states that judges in deciding cases on the enforcement of European Convention rights must have regard to the case law and jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. In addition by virtue of the European Communities Act 1972 (as amended) English courts are required to take notice of the decisions of the European Court of Justice. It is highly likely that this consistent engagement will result, over time, in a profound change to the tradition of statutory interpretation within the English legal system.

2012 ◽  
pp. 125-125

2019 ◽  
pp. 109-118
Author(s):  
Ioana Maria Costea

Our study will analyse, in national and European context, the normative and administrative dimensions of the taxpayers’ rights. Romanian legislation is generous in granting administrative rights to the taxpayer, especially in administrative procedures, such as communication with the administrative authority or tax control. The study will identify the legal regime of these rights and the legal consequences deriving from a possible breach. Romanian legislation also ensures a number of judicial rights, in accordance with the European Convention of Human Rights and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. The judicial rights are at the centre of the study, especially in the cases when the procedure is mixed with criminal elements. However, a significant number of particularities of the tax procedure mutate the content of these rights, such as the object of the complaint, the access to a judge through a mandatory preliminary procedure. In this sense, taxpayers’ rights have a different dynamic than the rights granted in common civil or criminal procedures. Through these lenses, our study will generate an inventory of rights underlining their enforcement regime and their particularities as to the common regulation.


2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document