Legalità e mutamenti giurisprudenziali nel diritto penale

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Galante
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
The State ◽  
Criminal Offence ◽  
The Past ◽  
Temporal Effect ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Individual

Over the past several years, constitutional, supreme and human rights courts had to deal with the problem of adjudicative retroactivity in criminal law with ever-greater intensity. Following the case Contrada c. Italie, in which the European Court of Human Rights found a violation of the legality principle under Art. 7 due to an unforeseeable retrospective application of a judicially created criminal offence, the issue of citizens’ safeguard upon an overruling occurrence is even more in the foreground. What temporal effect is best given to an unfavorable overruling decision? Should its application be limited to acts and conduct occurring after it or should it operate retrospectively and subject to criminal responsibility those who, acting in reliance on an earlier decision, did only what courts declared to be lawful? A limited prohibition of adjudicative retroactivity in criminal law seems to help foster an up-to-date relationship between the individual and the state.

THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL ASPECTS OF APPLYING THE PRINCIPLE OF NON BIS IN IDEM IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS RIGHT UKRAINE

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petro Olishchuk ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Legal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
European Court

The article analyzes the principle of non bis in idem in the context of the criminal legislation of Ukraine, as well as the identification of cases of violations of this principle by law enforcement bodies during the qualification of criminal offences and during the issue of judicial decisions. It is noted that criminal law is a branch of law that is connected with the establishment of a ban on committing a certain act under the threat of the application by the state of measures of coercion of a criminal nature. The establishment of such a ban and the determination of measures of criminal-legal coercion, as a consequence, for its violation, is potentially related to the restriction of human rights. Obviously, the restriction of these rights cannot be arbitrary and chaotic, but must be subject to certain rules, ideas, which reflect the general development of society. These include the principles of criminal law, in particular the principle of criminal law, enshrined in art. Article 61 of the Constitution of Ukraine states: “No one can be brought to legal responsibility twice for the same type of offence”. According to Article 2 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine, “no one may be brought to criminal responsibility for the same criminal offence more than once”. The article highlights the characteristic features of the investigated principle. It is stated that its role is extremely important for the internal construction of the field of law, as well as the correct normalisation and law enforcement. There are cases of violations of this principle by law enforcement bodies during the qualification of criminal offences and during the issue of judicial decisions, on examples of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights and Ukrainian judicial proceedings. The European Court of Human Rights’s case-law on the application of Article 4 of the Convention is inconsistent and, in some cases, even contradictory. The principle of non bis in idem in the resolution of the question of the inadmissibility of double incrimination ensures the observance of the rights of the person during the implementation of criminal prosecution, as well as ensures the completeness of criminal legal qualification, the individualization of criminal responsibility and punishment.

Closing Ports of Safety: A Legitimate Strategy of Migration Control?

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-127
Author(s):  
Lena Riemer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Power ◽  
The Past ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
European Court ◽  
Migration Control ◽  
The Individual

In the past decades, the European Union and its member states have increasingly relied on externalization and non-arrival strategies for migration control. One of the latest developments is the decision by Malta and Italy to unilaterally close their ports to vessels carrying migrants rescued at sea. The article examines the conformity of such practices with the international law of the sea and focuses especially on the customary port of safety principle. It also addresses the applicability of the European Convention on Human Rights in cases where the rejected vessels have not entered the territory of a member state. The paper provides a novel approach for the establishment of the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisdiction in such cases of extraterritorial migration control, arguing that the jurisdiction could be founded on the imputable-public-power-test. Based on the analysis of potential violations of rights guaranteed by the Convention and its Protocols, the respective practices may, depending on the individual cases, violate the non-refoulement principle and/or the prohibition of collective expulsion.

The Best Interests of the Child in the Expulsion and First-entry Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights: How Principled is the Court’s Use of the Principle?

2015 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-103
Author(s):  
Ciara Smyth
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Individual

The principle of the best interests of the child is regularly referred to by the European Court of Human Rights in its jurisprudence involving children. However, the principle is notoriously problematic, and nowhere more so than in the immigration context where the state’s sovereign interests are keenly at stake. This article critically examines the expulsion and first-entry jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, interrogating whether a ‘principled’ approach is adopted to the best interests principle. It is argued that a principled approach is one which sees the best interests principle interpreted in the light of its parent document, the un Convention on the Rights of the Child, as interpreted by the un Committee on the Rights of the Child. It is demonstrated that despite widespread recourse to the best interests principle, the European Court of Human Rights fails to adopt a rights-based approach when identifying the best interests of the child and does not always give sufficient weight to the best interests of the child when balancing the interests of the state against those of the individual. The analysis also reveals a way for the Court to develop a more principled approach to the best interests principle.

scholarly journals Interpretation of some criminal law aspects of the right to respect for private life

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (15) ◽  
pp. 111-125
Author(s):  
Yuriivna Timofeyeva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Environmental Safety ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
The State ◽  
Private Life ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

The article considers some issues of interpretation of the right to privacy in the practice of the ECtHR and its impact on the criminal law of Ukraine. Numerous violations of the articles of the Convention require systematic response of the state and appropriate changes in both legislation and changes in law enforcement practices. The violations relate in particular to problems of interpretation of the provisions of the Convention. Provisions of Art. 8 of the Convention are related to other provisions of the Convention and the development of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on certain issues. It is noted that the Convention is dynamic, it changes under the influence of society, its provisions change in the process of development and acquire new meanings. In particular, the ECtHR recognizes a violation of Art. 8 (right to respect for private life) in those contexts in which he has not previously recognized. In particular, interpretation of Art. 8 of the Convention in the context of the right to environmental safety in case significant harm to the persons health (cases Dubetska and others v. Ukraine, Grymkivska v. Ukraine), the right to beg in the context of the right to freedom of expression (Lakatush v. Switzerland). It is established that the development of these provisions requires analysis and consideration in the development of a new Criminal Code. At the same time, care must be taken to maintain a balance between freedoms and human rights and the security of society and the state. It is important that the rights enshrined in the Convention remain fundamental and do not go beyond the interests and needs of the individual. In addition, it is also necessary to take into account the national characteristics of the state.

scholarly journals INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS STANDARDS AND RUSSIAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 61-66
Author(s):  
A. A. Tarasov
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
The State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Human Rights Standards

The novelty lies in the author's assessment of the impact of international human rights standards and a fair trial procedure not only on the criminal justice itself, but also on the entire system of relations between the state and the individual, as well as in a critical analysis of clauses found in the literature on possible restrictions on the application of the European Court's practice on human rights in Russia. The aim of the work is to substantiate the unconditionally positive influence of international human rights and justice standards on the Russian criminal justice system and the relationship between the state, the individual and society. The objective is to demonstrate, using examples from the literature and practice of the European Court of Human Rights, the undoubtedly positive impact of the application in Russia of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights on Russian criminal justice and on all practical jurisprudence in Russia. The article uses the methods of system analysis and synthesis, comparative legal and historical methods. As a result, the author's conclusions about the inadmissibility and inappropriateness of limiting the operation on the territory of Russia of international human rights standards and fair trial procedures expressed in the European Convention and court decisions of the European Court have been substantiated. In conclusion, these brief conclusions are formulated.

Human Rights as Everyone’s Business

2019 ◽  
pp. 167-194
Author(s):  
Rowan Cruft
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Collective Goods ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

The first half of Chapter 10 addresses criticisms of the conception of human rights developed in Chapter 9: that it overlooks how human rights law protects collective goods rather than the individual, and that it overlooks the centrality of the state as duty-bearer in human rights law. The author’s response includes noting that state-focused human rights law is only one way in which ‘natural’ human rights are institutionalized: criminal law and non-law policy also play human rights roles. The chapter’s second half argues that human rights not only exist ‘for the right-holder’s sake’ (as in Chapters 7–9) but are also rights whose protection is distinctively ‘everyone’s business’: rights with which any human anywhere can show solidarity by demanding their fulfilment. This does not imply that human rights violations in one state are equally every state’s business. The chapter ends by summarizing Part II (Chapters 7–10) as vindicating the idea of human rights.

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.

Environmental Displacement in European Asylum Law

2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 313-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Finn Myrstad ◽  
Vikram Kolmannskog
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Work Force ◽  
Displaced Persons ◽  
Temporary Protection ◽  
European Court ◽  
Asylum Law ◽  
The Individual ◽  
International Border ◽  
The Eu ◽  
Environmental Displacement

AbstractEnvironmentally displaced persons can be included in several existing categories of protected persons under international law, but there may be a normative protection gap for many of those who cross an international border. This article looks at protection possibilities within the EU framework and national European legislations. Environmental displacement can arguably trigger temporary protection according to the EU Temporary Protection Directive. There may also be environmentally displaced persons who require longer-term or permanent protection. Drawing on the EU Qualification Directive and case-law from the European Court of Human Rights, one can argue that subsidiary protection should be granted in certain cases of extreme natural disaster or degradation. In less extreme cases, humanitarian asylum could be granted. Human rights principles such as non-refoulement could also be used to extend at least basic protection. In addition, legal labour migration could supply a work force, assist distressed countries and enhance protection of the individual. A strategy to meet the challenge of environmental displacement must also include climate change mitigation and external measures such as adaptation. Most of the displaced persons in the world today and in the near future do not arrive at the EU borders.

Remarks by Sean D. Murphy

2020 ◽  
Vol 114 ◽  
pp. 193-199
Author(s):  
Sean D. Murphy ◽  
Claudio Grossman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Human Rights Movement ◽  
Interstate System ◽  
International Human ◽  
The Individual

Our conversation might begin by looking backward a bit. The human rights movement from 1945 onward has been one of the signature accomplishments of the field of international law, one that refocused our attention from a largely interstate system to a system where the individual moved in from the periphery to the center. Human rights champions point to numerous landmark treaties, numerous institutions, and the rise of NGOs as a critical vehicle for developing and monitoring human rights rules. Yet others look at the international human right system and still see the state as overly central, tolerating and paying lip service to human rights, but too easily discarding them when they prove to be inconvenient. The persistence of racism comes to mind. As a general matter, how would you assess the strengths and weaknesses of the system that was built essentially during your lifetime?

Reflections on the existence of the science of criminal law

2021 ◽  
pp. 156-161
Author(s):  
I. Mytrofanov
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Crime And Punishment ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
Illegal Acts ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Right

The article states that today the issues of the role (purpose) of criminal law, the structure of criminal law knowledge remain debatable. And at this time, questions arise: whose interests are protected by criminal law, is it able to ensure social justice, including the proportionality of the responsibility of the individual and the state for criminally illegal actions? The purpose of the article is to comprehend the problems of criminal law knowledge about the phenomena that shape the purpose of criminal law as a fair regulator of public relations, aimed primarily at restoring social justice for the victim, suspect (accused), society and the state, the proportionality of punishment and states for criminally illegal acts. The concepts of “crime” and “punishment” are discussed in science. As a result, there is no increase in knowledge, but an increase in its volume due to new definitions of existing criminal law phenomena. It is stated that the science of criminal law has not been able to explain the need for the concept of criminal law, as the role and name of this area is leveled to the framework terminology, which currently contains the categories of crime and punishment. Sometimes it is not even unreasonable to think that criminal law as an independent and meaningful concept does not exist or has not yet appeared. There was a custom to characterize this right as something derived from the main and most important branches of law, the criminal law of the rules of subsidiary and ancillary nature. Scholars do not consider criminal law, for example, as the right to self-defense. Although the right to self-defense is paramount and must first be guaranteed to a person who is almost always left alone with the offender, it is the least represented in law, developed in practice and available to criminal law subjects. Today, for example, there are no clear rules for the necessary protection of property rights or human freedoms. It is concluded that the science of criminal law should develop knowledge that will reveal not only the content of the subject of this branch of law, but will focus it on new properties to determine the illegality of acts and their consequences, exclude the possibility of using its means by legal entities against each other.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document