The problem of recognition by the European union of "Crimean" passports

2020 ◽  
pp. 6-13
Author(s):  
S. Gavrilova ◽  
E. Bumagina

The article considers the problem of non-recognition by member countries of the European Union, the Russian passports issued on the territory of the Republic of Crimea and Sevastopol city, and the difficulty of obtaining a Schengen visa by citizens of these regions. The EU's position on this issue is a violation of human rights and contradicts the norms of international law. The authors suggest possible solutions to this problem.

2001 ◽  
Vol 40 (5) ◽  
pp. 1242-1253

In order to comply with its responsibilities for Hungarians living abroad and to promote the preservation and development of their manifold relations with Hungary prescribed in paragraph (3) of Article 6 of the Constitution of the Republic of Hungary;Considering the European integration endeavours of the Republic of Hungary and in-keeping with the basic principles espoused by international organisations, and in particular by the Council of Europe and by the European Union, regarding the respect of human rights and the protection of minority rights;Having regard to the generally recognised rules of international law, as well as to the obligations of the Republic of Hungary assumed under international law


2020 ◽  
pp. 92-97
Author(s):  
A. V. Kuznetsov

The article examines the norms of international law and the legislation of the EU countries. The list of main provisions of constitutional and legal restrictions in the European Union countries is presented. The application of the norms is described Human rights conventions. The principle of implementing legal acts in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic is considered. A comparative analysis of legal restrictive measures in the States of the European Union is carried out.


Teisė ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 110 ◽  
pp. 24-45
Author(s):  
Ingrida Danėlienė

[full article, abstract in English; abstract in Lithuanian] The article investigates the right to respect for family life, established by Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, as applied and interpreted in conjunction with the right to marry and the right to found a family, laid down in Article 9 of the Charter. The standard of protection set by European Union law regarding these rights is identified by taking into account the standard of protection of the relevant rights established by the European Convention on Human Rights and the established case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Topical issues relating to the consolidation of these individual rights at the national level in the Republic of Lithuania are also addressed in the article. In doing so, an emphasis is laid on the content of the concepts of “family” and “family life” under supranational and national law.


Author(s):  
Viktoriya Kuzma

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.


2001 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peeter Järvelaid

The Republic of Estonia is one of those European countries for which the year 1918 meant a deep and radical change in the development of their states. During the last decade, these states – Austria, Hungary, the Czech Republic (the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic in 1918), Poland, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia – have all become Member States of or applicant countries to the European Union. On 28 July 1922, the Republic of Estonia was de jure recognized by the Government of the United States. This was an important act, since soon afterwards, on 22 September 1922, Estonia became a member of the League of Nations. Estonia had thus become a subject of international law.


Author(s):  
Marina Čepo

Restrictions on freedom of movement, in particular the detention of asylum seekers as the most severe form of such restrictions, constitute an interference with fundamental human rights and must be approached with particular care. In view of the migration and refugee crisis, the Republic of Hungary has begun to amend its asylum legislation, thus tightening the conditions for the detention of asylum seekers. The introduction of the provision establishing that asylum may be sought only in transit zones has also led to the gradual detention of asylum seekers in transit zones, which Hungary did not consider as detention. This issue was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union (hereinafter: CJEU), which drastically changed the path taken by the Hungarian government when it comes to detaining asylum seekers. What the CJEU has found is that leaving people in transit zones without the right to free movement is to be considered detention, even though they are not specialized detention facilities. The CJEU ordered that such a practice must cease immediately. Therefore, this paper will examine the Hungarian practice following the judgment of the CJEU. The CJEU has taken a major step towards protecting the rights of asylum seekers as regards detention, and the EU recently adopted amendments as part of the new Pact on Migration and Asylum aimed at improving the existing asylum system. The second part of the paper analyzes the provisions of the new Pact on Migration and Asylum related to detention in order to determine whether the proposed amendments contribute to the Common European Asylum System and the protection of the human rights of asylum seekers or represent a step backwards.


2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 223-241 ◽  
Author(s):  
Özgür H. Çınar

Abstract The question of religious education has been debated in Turkey since the founding of the Republic of Turkey in 1923. However, with Turkey’s commencement of the accession process towards becoming a full member of the European Union, this debate has intensified and after the judgment in the Hasan and Eylem Zengin case at the European Court of Human Rights in 2007, obligations arising from international law have become more impellent.


2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 165-184
Author(s):  
Raimundas Moisejevas ◽  
◽  
Justina Nasutavičienė ◽  

Teisė ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 77 ◽  
pp. 162-180
Author(s):  
Kristina Pranevičienė

Straipsnyje analizuojamos vaikų grobimo Europos Sąjungos valstybėse narėse atvejais taikomos teis­mingumo nustatymo taisyklės, įtvirtintos 2003 m. lapkričio 27 d. Europos Tarybos reglamente (EB) Nr. 2201/2003 dėl jurisdikcijos ir teismo sprendimų, susijusių su santuoka ir tėvų pareigomis, pripažinimo bei vykdymo (sutrumpintai vadinamas Reglamentu Briuselis IIa arba Briuselis IIbis), taip pat Reglamento Briuselis IIa ir 1980 m. Hagos konvencijos „Dėl tarptautinio vaikų grobimo civilinių aspektų“ bei šiuos tarptautinės teisės aktus įgyvendinančio 2008 m. lapkričio 13 d. Lietuvos Respublikos civilinį procesą re­glamentuojančių Europos Sąjungos ir tarptautinės teisės aktų įgyvendinimo įstatymo nuostatos, regla­mentuojančios pagrobtų vaikų grąžinimą bei praktinės jų taikymo problemos. The article analyses the rules of jurisdiction in the cases of child abduction within the Member States of the European Union, which are established in Regulation of 27 November 2003 (EC) No 2201/2003 concerning jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgement in matrimonial matters and the matters of parental responsibility (abbreviated as Regulation Brussels IIa or Brussels IIbis), as well as the provisions of Regulation Brussels IIa, 1980 Hague Convention on International Child Abduction and 13 November 2008 Law of the Republic of Lithuania, implementing the acts of European Union and inter­national law, regulating civil process, implementing those instruments of international law, regulating the return of abducted children and practical problems of their application.


2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (100) ◽  
pp. 257
Author(s):  
Raúl Canosa Usera

Resumen:El artículo pretende analizar la evolución de la protección de la integridad personal en España desde la aprobación de la Constitución de 1978 hasta el presente.En primer lugar, se aborda el contexto en el que la Constitución fue aprobada y las opciones que al constituyente se le abrían. Se destaca que por primera vez en España se reconocía un específico derecho a la integridad, lo que no es habitual, al lado de la tradicional prohibición de torturas y penas o tratos inhumanos o degradantes que arrancó ya con la constitución de 1812.Era necesario analizar la protección de la integridad en el Derecho Internacional de los derechos humanos que España ha incorporado a su Orden jurídico, así como la Carta de Derechos fundamentales de la Unión Europea Que sí proclama el derecho a la integridad. En este sentido es destacable como el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos ha inferido el derecho a la integridad de la forma más generosa a través de una interpretación evolutiva del derecho a la vida privada.Sin embargo, no es fácil determinar ni cuál es el bien jurídico protegido ni cuáles las posiciones iusfundamentales que contiene; es decir, qué se protege y cuáles son las situaciones de la vida cuya vulneración el titular del derecho puede defender, llegado el caso, activando la labor tutelar de los tribunales. Por ello ha sido fundamental también el intenso desarrollo legislativo que lo ha concretado en diversos sectores del ordenamiento así como las medidas de protección en favor de los más vulnerables.Summary:1. The 1978 Context in which the right to integrity was recognized. 1.1 Overview of International Law and Foreign Constitutional Law. 1.2 The options of the Constituent Power in the process of drafting Article 15 of the Spanish Constitution. 2. The evolutionary interpretation of international law. 2.1 The extension of the protection field of Article 3 ECHR. 2.2 The inclusion of contents of the right to integrity into the right to respect for private life. a) Right to a criminal protection of the integrity. b) Right to authorize or refuse medical treatments. c) Right to sexual and reproductive life. The problem of abortion. d) Face to pollution. e) In the home. 3. Specific recognition of the right to integrity in the charter of fundamental rights of the European Union. 4. Determination of the fundamental positions under the right to integrity. 4.1 Procedural violation of the prohibition of torture. 4.2 Regarding health protection and in the heath field. a) Overlap with the right to health. b) Consent to medical treatment. c) Donations and transplants. d) Abortion as a potential exercise of the right to integrity by the pregnant woman. f) In the field of medical and scientific experiments. 4.3 Right to integrity against pollution. 4.4 Right to protection. 4.5 The guarantee to not suffer legal physical interventions and the exclusion of the indemnity guarantee. 4.6 In the special relationships of subjection. 4.7 In the labor market. 5. Conclusion: what object and what content?AbstractThe article tries to analyze the evolution of the protection of integrity in Spain since the Constitution came into force in 1978. First of all, it is addressed the context in which the Constitution was approved as well as the options opened to Constituent Power. It is underlined that, for the first time in Spain, a specific right to integrity is declared, something unusual at that time, together with the traditional prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, already introduced in the Constitution of 1812.It was necessary to analyze how the protection of integrity in International Law on Human Rights, as well as the right to the integrity of the person, proclaimed specifically in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In this sense, it is remarkable how the European Court of Human Rights has inferred a right to the integrity from the right to respect for private and family life, by interpreting evolutionarily the Convention.However, it is not easy to determine neither the object of the right to integrity nor what are the fundamental positions, the life situations, whose violation should permit person to claim in Courts of Justice, by activating their protective function. For the rest, it has also been crucial the intense legislative  development that has implemented, in various sectors of the legal system,measures of protection in favor of the most vulnerable people.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document