Interpretation of the terms “torture”, “inhuman treatment”, “degrading dignity of treatment or punishment” in the understanding of the European court of human rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 111-116
Author(s):  
Taras Zhyvka
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Individual Characteristics ◽  
Proper Understanding ◽  
European Court ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Fundamental Values ◽  
Positive Effect ◽  
Problem Setting

Problem setting. According to the data as of 01.01.2020 in the register of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) are registered 8850 applications filed against Ukraine, which is 14.8% of the total number of applications. And although Ukraine took 3rd place (in 2017 Ukraine ranked first) in the number of complaints against it to the ECtHR, after Russia (15,050 complaints) and Turkey (9,250 complaints), it should be noted that a significant number of complaints, namely 40 complaints are still in breach of Article 3 of the ECHR (prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment). Thus, the correct interpretation and understanding of the concepts used in Article 3 of the ECHR is very important for Ukraine, it is related both to the quality of adopted laws and to the practice of the authorities, especially law enforcement and courts. Analysis of recent researches and publications. The research of certain aspects of the interpretation of the concepts of Article 3 of the ECHR was studied by the following Ukrainian legal scholars: Orlova O.O., Trykhlib H., Tsebenko S., Okhota Y., Shishkina E., Rabinovych P. , Pushkar P., Fuley T., Chervyatsova A. Target of research is interpretation of the concepts used in Article 3 of the Convention on the basis of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, for their proper understanding and application. Conclusions and prospects for the development. Thus, the prohibitions in Article 3 of the ECHR are absolute and unconditional. Prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is one that contains no exceptions, regardless of the situation in which the person is. This norm is an imperative norm and clearly reflects the basic (fundamental) values of a democratic society, and any violation of it by the international community is considered a gross violation of human rights. Everyone has the right to be treated with dignity by others, regardless of individual characteristics, circumstances or place (in hospitals, at large, in places of imprisonment). Everyone should be aware of the inadmissibility of such actions, and these prohibitions should not only be declared, but also implemented. In general, the ECtHR has a positive effect on respect for human rights in Ukraine and is a real mechanism for protecting citizens in many cases.

Principles Corroborated by Practice? The Use of Country of Origin Information by the European Court of Human Rights in the Assessment of a Real Risk of a Violation of the Prohibition of Torture, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment

2016 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 302-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Femke Vogelaar
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Country Of Origin ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Real Risk ◽  
Consistent Manner ◽  
Standard Set ◽  
Degrading Treatment

This article studies the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) approach to country of origin information in its case law under Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights. It will first examine the standard set by the ECtHR on the use of country of origin information, followed by an assessment of the application of these principles by the ECtHR in its case law. The article specifically focusses on the use of country of origin information in expulsion cases of applicants from Somalia, Tamils applicants from Sri Lanka and applicants from Iran. The analysis of the ECtHR’s case law in this article will show that the ECtHR does not apply its own standards in a transparent and consistent manner. This raises questions as to the quality of the ECtHR’s assessment of the risk of a violation of Article 3.

scholarly journals Disposal of the person’s hospitalization in the medical insitution for conducting forensic examinations in the criminal procceedings

2021 ◽  
pp. 10-17
Author(s):  
Dinu Ostavciuc ◽  
◽  
Tudor Osoianu ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Medical Institution ◽  
Individual Freedom ◽  
The Right To Privacy ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Expertise ◽  
Fundamental Values

Individual freedom is one of the fundamental values protected by the European Convention on Human Rights, due to its importance, requiring a rigorous review by the European Court of Human Rights of any measure that could infringe this value. At the same time, this fundamental right is protected by the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova and the Code of Criminal Procedure, due to which individual freedom is inviolable, and its coercion is allowed only in cases and with the procedure strictly regulated by law. The hospitalization of the person in the medical institution is a form of de privation of liberty and, respectively, it is going to take place only on the basis of a court authorization. At the same time, the person’s hospitalization can affect the right to privacy. It is therefore strictly necessary that the whole procedure be followed imperatively and without exception. The disposition of the forced internment of the person in a medical institution for the performance of judicial expertise in the criminal process is within the competence of the investigating judge. Therefore, this article is dedicated to the procedure regarding the hospitalization of the person in the medical institution, on the basis of grounds and reasons on which the hospitalization can take place, the attribution of the criminal investigation body and the prosecutor in cases when there is a need to hospitalize the person.

Remedies for breaches of prisoners’ rights in the European Prison Rules

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 467-488
Author(s):  
Kresimir Kamber
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Committee ◽  
Human Rights Practice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Effective Operation ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Rules And Standards

This article looks into the architecture of remedies for breaches of the right of prisoners not to be subjected to inadequate conditions of detention under the revised 2020 European Prison Rules (EPR). It seeks to expound the consistency and rationality of the relevant provisions of the 2020 EPR from the perspective of relevant principles and specific prescriptions of European prison law. For the purpose of the present article, the term ‘European prison law’ encompasses rules and standards set out in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, practice of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the provisions of the EPR. The article finds that, in this context, there is sufficient coherence in the relevant principles of European prison law – faithfully codified in the 2020 EPR – providing clear guidance to European States on how to put in place a system of remedies for breaches of prisoners’ rights and how to ensure its effective operation in practice.

Environment protection and Human Rights: The urban environment in International Courts of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (130) ◽  
pp. 292-315
Author(s):  
Mariane Morato Stival ◽  
Sandro Dutra e Silva
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Environmental Protection ◽  
Urban Environment ◽  
Urban Context ◽  
Healthy Environment ◽  
Regional Systems ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Right

This article is about the relation between environmental protection and human rights. The right to healthy environment is directly related to the right to life, in its meaning quality of life. The right to the environment has been analyzed in an indirect and reflexive way in regional systems for the protection of human rights. The purpose of this study is to analyze the right to the urban environment in the jurisprudence of the Inter-American and European human Rights Systems. In the methodological context, the analysis will be made of the theory and international legislation of these regional systems on the environment, the jurisprudence analysis of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and the European Court of Human Rights on the urban environment. Possible contributions will be made by the European Court to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights for the extension of environmental protection in the urban context.

Registration of Religious Entities and Religious Autonomy in Romania—Old Limitations and New Challenges

2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Romanița Elena Iordache
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Adoption Process ◽  
European Court ◽  
Tier System ◽  
New Challenges ◽  
The Law ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right

Abstract In January 2013, the Romanian Law on Religious Freedom and the General Status of Religious Denominations reached five years of implementation—the right time to assess the quality of the law, its fairness and enforceability, the way it responded to foreseeable challenges but, most importantly, to unexpected ones. Though, at the time of its adoption, law-makers, practitioners and religious denominations alike considered the law a working compromise doomed to be amended soon, no amendments were made so far. In spite of criticisms concerning the over-restrictive three tier system of registration for religious entities, voiced during the adoption process and subsequently, the biggest challenge for the law came however from a different direction through a little known case decided by the European Court of Human Rights in January 2012 and referred to the Grand Chamber in July 2012. The domestic proceedings as well as the chamber judgment in Sindicatul Păstorul Cel Bun v. Romania highlight that the principle of religious autonomy and the relation between state and Church still need to be defined and enforced in the Romanian context.1

scholarly journals The Right Not to be Dominated: The Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights on Migrants’ Destitution

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-314
Author(s):  
Lieneke Slingenberg
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Host State ◽  
European Court ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
New Perspective ◽  
The Right ◽  
Republican Theory

Abstract The European Court of Human Rights increasingly deals with migrants’ complaints about destitution in their host state under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (the prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment). This case law has been criticized for not being consistent and/or for not providing migrants with enough protection. Based on a systematic case law search, in this article, I analyse Article 3 case law on migrants’ destitution from a new perspective: the concept of freedom as non-domination, as developed in (neo) republican theory. It will argue that, seen through this lens, many tendencies in the Court’s case law can be explained and constructed as consistent, and it is submitted that in this way the Court does provide migrants with important protection against unfreedom. Nevertheless, I also argue in the article that the case law could be improved in a number of ways in order to provide more effective and robust protection against domination.

The European Court of Human Rights and the right to clean water and sanitation

Water Policy ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 282-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katharina Franziska Braig
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Clean Water ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Human Right ◽  
Creative Development ◽  
Water And Sanitation ◽  
European Court ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Right

Abstract The human right to clean water and sanitation is currently under discussion in the European Union. During this discussion, it should not be forgotten that another European organisation, namely the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), is becoming increasingly active regarding pan-European minimum standards relating to the right to clean water and sanitation. Although it is widely recognised that clean drinking water and sanitation are essential to the realisation of all human rights, no such obligation can be found in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). This article reviews the creative development of the jurisprudence of the ECtHR concerning the right to clean water and sanitation using two interpretation techniques, namely the ‘living instrument’ doctrine and the ‘practical and effective’ doctrine. Today, the ECtHR recognises, for example, that a breach of a State's obligation to respect the right to water can amount to a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on inhuman or degrading treatment. By failing to oblige companies to curb water pollution, the Court has also held that a State can be liable for a breach of Article 8 of the Convention, namely the right to respect for private and family life.

scholarly journals Sports in the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jakub Czepek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Point Of Interest ◽  
European Court ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Right

Sport has been an object of interest of international law on several occasions. It has also been a point of interest of regional human rights protection, for example within the legal system of Council of Europe. Recently, the European Court of Human Rights has developed its case-law concerning sport-related issues, such as football supporters related violence and prevention of events of hooliganism, anti-doping related issues or fairness of proceedings before The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in Lausanne or the protection of professional athletes’ rights in the context of anti-doping requirements. The article focuses on the ECtHR case-law relating to sport within the meaning of the  right to life (art. 2 of the ECHR), prohibition of torture of inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (art. 3 of the ECHR), right to liberty and security (art.5 of the ECHR), right to a fair trial (art.6 of the ECHR) or right to protection of private and family life (art.8 of the ECHR).

The right to a good quality of life in care homes or in nursing homes

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Cahill
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Term Care ◽  
People With Dementia ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
The Right ◽  
Human Rights Standards

Based on the UN Convention, (CRPD, 2006), the purpose of this chapter is to review some fundamental rights we all enjoy, yet for a variety of reasons may be threatened or violated in people living with dementia in long term residential care. Drawing on the relevant literature, the chapter will also tease out some of the discrepancies between human rights standards as articulated in the UN Convention (CRPD, 2006) and the reality of everyday life experienced by people with dementia living in long term care. A third aim of the chapter is to analyze the extent to which access to these rights are embedded and articulated in policy documents including national dementia strategies. The core human rights topics which will be discussed include Article 15 (the right to freedom from torture or cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment), Article 22 (the right to respect for privacy), Article 9 (the right to access especially to the physical environment) and Article 30 (the right to participate in cultural life, recreation and leisure).

Appointment and Dis-Appointment at the CJEU: Part I – The FV/Simpson Litigation

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-165
Author(s):  
Kieran Bradley
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Service ◽  
National Level ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Review Procedure ◽  
Civil Service Tribunal ◽  
The Right ◽  
Fundamental Values

Abstract This first part of a two-part article examines the rulings of the General Court and the Court of Justice concerning the irregular appointment in 2016 of a judge to the Union’s Civil Service Tribunal (now abolished). The CJEU was acting more or less in tandem with the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Ástráðsson v. Iceland; between them, these courts have confirmed for their respective legal orders that the right to a fair trial before a “tribunal established by law” includes a requirement that the judge(s) be appointed in accordance with the predetermined procedure. This requirement is not, however, absolute, but seeks ultimately to safeguard the independence and impartiality of the judiciary; it must therefore be balanced with other fundamental values, such as legal certainty and the irremovability of judges. The Simpson ruling may also have a certain resonance at the national level, as well as showcasing the CJEU’s remarkable “review” procedure, now in abeyance.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document