Jawność postępowania sądowego w świetle Europejskiej konwencji praw człowieka

Case Files ◽

Court Proceedings ◽

Polish Law ◽

Definition Of ◽

Openness of court proceedings in compliance with the European Convention on Human Rights The subject of this article is the right to open court proceedings as guaranteed in Article 6(1) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The most important elements of this right are: the right to participate in a court hearing, the right to access to the case files and the right to acquaint with the ruling. This right applies not only to the parties to the proceedings, but also – albeit to a lesser extent – to every citizen. The text discusses the findings of the doctrine and the European Court of Human Rights, at times criticizing them especially with regard to the too narrow definition of the obligation to publicly announce the judgment. In addition, the article analyzes the extent to which the Polish law encourages openness in civil, criminal and judicial-administrative procedures.

The Idea of Human Rights in Conditions of Hospital Treatment

Public Health and Welfare ◽

10.4018/978-1-5225-1674-3.ch053 ◽

2016 ◽

pp. 1147-1165

Author(s):

Bogusław Sygit ◽

Damian Wąsik

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Civil Liberties ◽

European Convention ◽

Hospital Treatment ◽

Political Rights ◽

Human Rights Abuses ◽

Cultural Rights ◽

European Court ◽

Definition Of ◽

The aim of this chapter is describing of the influence of universal human rights and civil liberties on the formation of standards for hospital care. The authors present definition of the right to life and the right to health. Moreover in the section it is discussed modern standards of hospital treatment under the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality. The authors discuss in detail about selected examples realization of human rights in the treatment of hospital and forms of their violation. During the presentation of these issues, the authors analyze a provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and use a number of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights issued in matters concerning human rights abuses in the course of treatment and hospitalization.

Does Self-isolation Violate the Right to Liberty? An Analysis of the European Court of Human Rights’ Practice in Light of the Ukrainian Experience

European Journal of Health Law ◽

10.1163/15718093-bja10024 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 27 (4) ◽

pp. 368-385

Author(s):

Yana Litins’ka ◽

Oleksandra Karpenko

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Stress Test ◽

European Convention ◽

Legal Systems ◽

Human Rights Practice ◽

Rapid Action ◽

European Court ◽

Fundamental Freedoms ◽

Abstract COVID-19 became a stress-test for many legal systems because it required that a balance be found between rapid action to prevent the spread of the disease, and continued respect for human rights. Many states in Europe, including Ukraine, chose to enforce an obligation to self-isolate. In this article we review what the obligation to self-isolate entails in the case of Ukraine. We also analyse whether such an obligation should be viewed as a deprivation or a mere restriction of liberty, and if it is permissible under the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

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

The American Journal of International Law ◽

10.5305/amerjintelaw.107.2.0417 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 107 (2) ◽

pp. 417-423 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Irini Papanicolopulu

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

European Convention ◽

International Convention ◽

European Court ◽

The Status ◽

Grand Chamber ◽

Effective Remedy ◽

Maritime Search And Rescue ◽

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.

Some decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of the European Union con cerning the right of asylum

Comparative Research In Law and Politics ◽

10.12737/5251 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

pp. 68-74

Author(s):

Габриэлла Белова ◽

Gabriela Belova ◽

Мария Хаджипетрова-Лачова ◽

Maria Hadzhipetrova-Lachova

Keyword(s):

European Union ◽

Human Rights ◽

European Convention ◽

The European Union ◽

Protective Mechanisms ◽

Eu Member States ◽

European Court ◽

The Right ◽

The Eu

The authors analyze certain cases considered in recent years by the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of European Union in Luxembourg and associated with providing of asylum to the third country nationals. In individual EU member states there are huge differences in the procedures and protective mechanisms for asylum seekers in their access to work, as well as in the use of mechanism of forced detention. Due to accession of the EU to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the EU should comply the standards set by the Council of Europe. The authors analyze the new approach of the Strasbourg Court in decision MSS v. Belgium and Greece unlike other "Dublin" cases. They also consider certain new judgements of the Court of European Union in Luxembourg, some of which were accepted in order of urgent prejudicial production.

The European Court of Human Rights: Sabeh El Leil v. France

International Legal Materials ◽

10.5305/intelegamate.51.1.0001 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 51 (1) ◽

pp. 1-16

Author(s):

Gilles Cuniberti

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Fair Trial ◽

European Convention ◽

Sovereign Immunity ◽

European Court ◽

Fundamental Freedoms ◽

The Right ◽

Wrongful Dismissal

In Sabeh el Leil v. France, the European Court of Human Rights (‘‘ECtHR’’ or ‘‘the Court’’) ruled for the second time that a contracting state had violated the right to a fair trial afforded by Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (‘‘Convention’’) by denying access to its courts to an embassy employee suing for wrongful dismissal on the grounds that the employer enjoyed sovereign immunity. The ECtHR had first ruled so a year earlier in Cudak v. Lithuania, where the plaintiff was also an embassy employee.

Internet and freedom of expression in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights

Zbornik radova Pravnog fakulteta Novi Sad ◽

10.5937/zrpfns54-24432 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 54 (3) ◽

pp. 1023-1042

Author(s):

Ljiljana Mijović

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Freedom Of Expression ◽

Case Law ◽

Private Life ◽

European Convention ◽

The Internet ◽

European Court ◽

The Right ◽

And Control

Internet as a means of communication, whatever the type of information it might be used for, falls within the exercise of the right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. As established in the European Court's case law, freedom of expression constitutes one of the essentials of a democratic society, therefore limitations on that freedom foreseen in Article 10 § 2 of the Convention are to be interpreted strictly. In order to ensure effective protection of one's freedom of expression on the Internet, States bear a positive obligation to create an appropriate regulatory framework, balancing the right to freedom of expression on one and the limitations prescribed in Article 10 § 2, on the other hand. Special attention in doing so is to be paid to the risk of harm posed by content and communications on the Internet to the exercise and enjoyment of other human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the European Convention, particularly the right to respect for private life. While it is the fact that the electronic network, serving billions of users worldwide, will never be subject to the same regulations and control, because of the national authorities' margin of appreciation, the European Court established commonly applicable general principles regarding the Internet as a media of exercising right to freedom of expression.

Study of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in criminal law matters

Glasnik Advokatske komore Vojvodine ◽

10.5937/gakv0712371g ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 79 (9) ◽

pp. 371-395

Author(s):

Momčilo Grubač

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Case Law ◽

Procedural Law ◽

Inadmissible Evidence ◽

European Court ◽

Ne Bis In Idem ◽

Fundamental Freedoms ◽

Case Files ◽

This study includes certain number of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights that relate to the criminal procedural matters, primarily those constituting the right to a fair trial provided in Article 6 of the Convention for Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. These decisions were analyzed and interpreted in order to establish the practice of the Court in these procedural matters and to enable us to evaluate whether domestic criminal procedural law and its application are in line with this practice. The author dealt with the issues of prohibition to institute legal action twice for the same cause of action (ne bis in idem), immunities and privileges, right to court access, exclusion of inadmissible evidence from the criminal case files, right to the impartial court and right of defense to call and interrogate witnesses.

НЕКИ АСПЕКТИ ПРАВА НА СУДСКУ ЗАШТИТУ ЛИЦА СА МЕНТАЛНИМ СМЕТЊАМА У ПОСТУПКУ ЛИШЕЊА ПОСЛОВНЕ СПОСОБНОСТИ - ПРАКСА ЕВРОПСКОГ СУДА ЗА ЉУДСКА ПРАВА

TEME ◽

10.22190/teme171017035p ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 581

Author(s):

Dušica Palačković ◽

Sanda Ćorac

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Fair Trial ◽

European Convention ◽

Legal Capacity ◽

Mental Disabilities ◽

Persons With Disabilities ◽

European Court ◽

Key Concepts ◽

The paper analyzes certain important aspects of the procedural position of persons with mental disabilities in the procedures for deprivation of legal capacity. Regardless of the normative framework, both international and national, which largely protects the rights of this sensitive group of people, a significant number of cases before the European Court of Human Rights and decisions in which Contracting States are declared responsible indicate that there is a problem of their procedural position that is principally conditioned by applying (or not applying) the procedural safeguards provided by Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, or the right to a fair trial. Although this right is guaranteed for all civil and criminal procedures and for all persons, the special features of persons with mental disabilities also determine the particularities in the application of the right to a fair trial in the court procedures in which these persons are involved. Therefore, we could talk about formulated specific standards that essentially elaborate one of the key concepts of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities - "reasonable adaptation", as well as a direct link to the need for a specific application of the already mentioned Article 6 of the European Convention. The standards that follow from the application of Article 6 are numerous and the analysis of all from the aspect of protecting the rights of persons with mental disabilities is not possible in the paper of this volume, and therefore, special attention was given to the right of these persons to initiate and conduct the procedures for deprivation of legal capacity, personal participation and representation in that procedures.

Asserting the Right to Life (Article 2, ECHR) in the Context of Industry

German Law Journal ◽

10.1017/s2071832200005551 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. 231-253 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Dimitris Xenos

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

Self Regulation ◽

European Convention ◽

Right To Life ◽

Liberal Tradition ◽

European Court ◽

Active Protection ◽

The Right ◽

First Time

In the liberal tradition, there has always been scepticism about the state's involvement in the activities of industry. Instead, internal measures by way of self-regulation and collective action have been preferred. In recognition of the reality that exclusive reliance on such solutions has not prevented violations of human rights, to which a high constitutional importance is attached, other arrangements have to be provided. In the system of the European Convention of Human Rights (hereinafter the Convention), positive obligations are imposed engaging the state in the active protection of human rights. The need to protect human rights against the hazards of industry has been the main issue in the case of Öneryildiz v. Turkey, in which, for the first time in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter the Court), a claim under the right to life (Article 2 of the Convention) has successfully been asserted in the context of industry.

The Right to Compensation for Wrongful Conviction/Miscarriage of Justice in International Law

International Human Rights Law Review ◽

10.1163/22131035-00802003 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 215-244

Author(s):

Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

European Convention ◽

Political Rights ◽

Wrongful Conviction ◽

European Court ◽

Human Rights Treaties ◽

The Right ◽

African Commission ◽

Miscarriage Of Justice

Human rights treaties (including Article 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr); Article 3 of the Protocol No. 7 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; and Article 10 of the American Convention on Human Rights) explicitly protect the right to compensation for wrongful conviction or miscarriage of justice. The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights is silent on this right. The Human Rights Committee, the European Court of Human Rights, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have developed rich jurisprudence on the ambit of the right to compensation for wrongful conviction or miscarriage of justice. States have adopted different approaches to give effect to their obligation under Article 14(6) of the iccpr. Relying on the practice and/or jurisprudence from States in Africa, Europe, North America, Asia, and Latin America and on the jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee, the European Court of Human Rights, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the article illustrates the approaches taken by some States to give effect to Article 14(6) of the iccpr and the relevant regional human rights instruments.