scholarly journals La inútil prolongación de la agonía del artículo 294 de la Ley Orgánica del Poder Judicial (Comentario a las SSTC 8/2017, de 19 de enero, y 10/2017, de 30 de enero)

2017 ◽  
pp. 269-291
Author(s):  
Silvia DEL SAZ
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

LABURPENA: Giza Eskubideen Europako Auzitegiaren jurisprudentziaren ondorioz, Konstituzio Auzitegiak aurreko doktrina zuzendu behar izan du. Horretarako, errugabetasun-presuntziorako eskubidearen irismena zabaldu behar izan du, eta, administrazio-ebazpen zehatzaileetatik eta zigor-epaietatik harago, kalte-ordaina ukatzen duten erabakietara zabaldu du hori, Botere Judizialaren Lege Organikoaren 294. artikuluak eskatzen duen bezalaxe, errugabetasun-presuntzioaren printzipioa ezarri ostean akusatua absolbitu egin den baina delituzko egintzak egon ez zirela frogatu ez den kasuetarako. RESUMEN: Fruto de la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, el Tribunal Constitucional se ha visto obligado a rectificar su doctrina anterior extendiendo el alcance del derecho a la presunción de inocencia, más allá de las resoluciones administrativas sancionadoras y sentencias penales, a los pronunciamientos que, tal y como exige el art. 294 LOPJ, deniegan la indemnización en atención a que el acusado fue absuelto en aplicación del principio de presunción de inocencia sin que haya quedado probado que los hechos delictivos no existieron. ABSTRACT: As a result of the case law by the European Court of Human Rights, the Constitutional Court was compelled to rectify its former doctrine by broadening the scope of the right to the presumption of innocence beyond punitive administrative resolutions and criminal judgments to rulings that as art. 294 of Judiciary Act requires, deny the award of damages on the ground that the accused was acquitted due to the application of the principle of innocence without having been proved that the criminal offences did not exist.

The right to the protection of religious feelings versus freedom of expression in the light of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and the European Convention on Human Rights

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 58-83
Author(s):  
Janusz Roszkiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
A Value ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right

This article concerns the right to the protection of religious feelings as a value which justifies a restriction of freedom of expression. The right to the protection of religious feelings can be protected by three methods: civil, penal and administrative. The issue is discussed from the point of view of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and the European Convention on Human Rights, with particular emphasis on the case-law of the Polish Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

scholarly journals papel del artículo 8 CEDH en la construcción del margen de apreciación nacional y la doctrina de las obligaciones positivas del Estado

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lara Redondo Saceda
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
The Right

El artículo 8 del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos –que protege los derechos al respeto la vida privada y familiar, el domicilio y la correspondencia– se ha configurado en estos setenta años de Convenio como uno de los escenarios habituales del desarrollo del margen de apreciación nacional y la doctrina de las obligaciones positivas del Estado. Esto parece justificarse en el contenido y estructura de este artículo y en las restricciones y limitaciones al ejercicio de estos derechos establecidas por su párrafo segundo. En este marco, el objetivo de este artículo es analizar cuál ha sido el papel del artículo 8 CEDH en el desarrollo de estos estándares interpretativos y cómo ha influido en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights –which protects the right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence– has been configured as a traditional place for the development of the margin of appreciation and the doctrine of State’s positive obligations. The scope and structure of this article and its limitation clause in the second paragraph seem to justify these developments. In this context, the objective of this article is to analyse the role of Article 8 ECHR in the development of these interpretative standards and its influence in the European Court of Human Rights case-law.

scholarly journals Crisis económica y derechos humanos. Una nota de jurisprudencia

2015 ◽  
pp. 399
Author(s):  
Luis López Guerra
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Complete Separation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Court Case ◽  
Social Relevance ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

En estrecha conexión con la crisis económica, se ha presentado un considerable número de demandas ante el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos solicitando la protección de derechos económicos y sociales. Aún cuando el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos se ocupa de los llamados derechos «de la primera generación», la jurisprudencia del Tribunal, a partir de Airey c. Irlanda ha mantenido que no existe una completa separación entre derechos civiles y derechos sociales. Aplicando esta jurisprudencia, el Tribunal, en los últimos años, ha emitido diversas sentencias en que se considera que los derechos del Convenio también imponen obligaciones a los estados en materias de relevancia económica y social, como la cuantía de las pensiones, el derecho a la vivienda familiar o el tratamiento de los inmigrantes.Closely related to the economic crisis, a considerable number of requests for protection of economic and social rights have been filed at the European Court of Human Rights. Although the European Convention on Human Rights addresses the so-called «first generation» rights, Court case law since Airey vs. Ireland has maintained that a complete separation of civil and social rights cannot be made. In applying that case law, over the last few years the Court has issued several judgments underscoring that Convention rights also impose obligations on the States in matters of economic and social relevance, such as the amount of pensions, the right to a family home or the treatment of immigrants.

The European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights as Guardians of Fair Criminal Proceedings in Europe

2019 ◽  
pp. 88-114
Author(s):  
Bettina Weisser
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Public Hearing ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Procedural Rights

This chapter discusses the role of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) in safeguarding fair criminal proceedings in Europe. In particular, it analyzes the procedure-related guarantee of a fair trial and its various implications as they are laid down in Article 6 ECHR and shaped by the case law of the Court. The chapter first provides an overview of the general procedural guarantees under Article 6, section 1, focusing on the independence and impartiality of the tribunal, right to a fair hearing (equality of arms, the right to remain silent and the privilege against self-incrimination, entrapment), public hearing, and hearing within a reasonable time. It then considers procedural rights in criminal proceedings under sections 2 and 3 of Article 6, along with the presumption of innocence under section 2 and specifically listed minimum rights in criminal proceedings under section 3.

Austrian Constitutional Court: Vegan Landowner Must Tolerate Hunting on his Property

ICL Journal ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-137
Author(s):  
Nina Palmstorfer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Obligation ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Comprehensive Management ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

Abstract It follows from the settled case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) that the legal obligation of landowners to tolerate hunting on their property, although they oppose hunting on ethical grounds, may constitute a violation of the right to the peaceful enjoyment of one’s possessions. On the occasion of a landowner’s constitutional complaint the Austrian Constitutional Court assessed such obligation under the Carinthian Hunting Act and came to a different conclusion. In Austria there was a particular public interest in the comprehensive management of game which justifies the obligation to tolerate hunting despite of one’s beliefs. The landowner’s possibility to have the hunt suspended on land that is fully enclosed by a stable fence provided for in the provision was considered appropriate in order to protect the owners’ ethical interests. The Austrian Constitutional Court thus found that the compulsory hunting on one’s land in Carinthia does not violate Article 1 of Protocol No 1 to the ECHR.

scholarly journals Role of the European Court of Human Rights in realization of social security right

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-63
Author(s):  
Lyusya Mozhechuk ◽  
Andriy Samotuha
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Social Security ◽  
Occupational Injuries ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The article deals with the role of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in protecting the right to social security. There is the analysis of the case law of the ECtHR on the violation of the right to social security, namely the right to receive a pension, which the ECtHR classifies as property rights. The authors have outlined the ways to improve the practice of the ECtHR in this area in modern national and world socio-economic conditions. According to available estimates, around 50 per cent of the global population has access to some form of social security, while only 20 per cent enjoy adequate social security coverage. Ensuring an ap-propriate mechanism for the protection of human and civil rights is a priority for every country. However, according to case law, the number of complaints of violations or non-recognition of their rights is growing every year. An important role in the protection of human rights in today's conditions is played by an international judicial body - the European Court of Human Rights. In Ukraine, where socio-economic rights are recognized at the constitutional level, their guarantee content in the current laws is still not clearly defined, and therefore, as evidenced by the practice of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, legal mechanisms their protection, in particular the means of judicial control remain ineffective. The right to social security is the right to access and retention of benefits, both in cash and in kind, without discrimination in order to protect, in particular, against (a) lack of income from work caused by illness, disability, maternity, occupational injuries , unemployment, old age or death of a family member; (b) inaccessible access to medical care; (c) insufficient family support, especially for children and adult dependents. It is well known that the European Convention does not contain many socio-economic rights as such (with a few exceptions - protection of property and the right to education). Thus , the former president of the ECtHR Jean-Paul Costa specifically pointed to another important European human rights treaty – the European Social Charter. Human rights are a universal value, and their protection is the task of every state. The European Court of Human Rights plays an important role in protecting human rights in modern conditions. The functioning of such an international judicial institution can not only solve a problem of protection of violated rights, but also affect the development of the judicial system of each state. The main principle of realization and judicial protection of social rights is non-discrimination on the grounds of sex, age, race, national and social origin of the individual, and the role of auxiliary institutions of the Council of Europe in generalizing and improving the ECtHR’s activity has been emphasized.

scholarly journals Some Approaches to Define the Concept of “Access to Justice”

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 208-213
Author(s):  
Sverba Y. I.
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
The State ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Aid ◽  
Financial Barriers ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The article is dedicated to the analysis of the concept of "access to justice". The national legislation, the case law of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the European Court of Human Rights, as well as academic papers have been analyzed by the author. The author concludes that there are at least two approaches to define the concept of "access to justice": broadside and restricted one. The latter is inherent in Ukraine, since the Constitution stipulates that justice in Ukraine is exercised by the courts exclusively. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights explored in this article demonstrates a broad interpretation of the right to a fair trial, as quasi-judicial authorities are often empowered to make decisions that directly affect a person's rights and obligations. Foreign researchers are more progressive in determining the concept of access to justice: the latter is considered as an intention to resolve person's legal problems, not limited with access to classical judicial protection. Even though the access to justice concept is not legally defined, it includes the core elements as legal awareness of person’s rights; lack of financial barriers to access to the court; the right to free legal aid guaranteed by the state; a fair and independent court; a reasonable time to settle a dispute, as well as the enforcement of the judgment. The state could ensure the effective access to justice only if all of the said elements are implemented. At the same time, the states have both positive (to provide the right to free legal aid) and negative obligations (not to interfere with court activities, etc.). Keywords: access to justice, justice, right to a fair trial, rule

scholarly journals RESEÑA: Ovejero Puente, Ana María. Constitución y derecho a la presunción de inocencia,Tirant lo Blanch, Valencia 2006.

2007 ◽  
pp. 692
Author(s):  
Magdalena Lorenzo Rodríguez Armas
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Presumption Of Innocence ◽  
Spanish Constitution ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Historic Origin

This paper tries to offer a synthesis of the remarkable book wrote by the professor A. M.ª. Ovejero about «Constitution and the Right to the Presumption of Innocence» in the context of the Spanish Constitution. The author’s thesis expr esses the need of a new direction of the interpretation of the Spanish Constitutional Court about this right, in order to bring it a full content according to its historic origin and with the European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence.

Algunas reflexiones en torno a la sentencia Negrepontis-Giannisis contra Grecia y la jurisprudencia reciente del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos en materia de reconocimiento de decisiones judiciales extranjeras

2014 ◽  
pp. 3027-3042
Author(s):  
Juan M. VELÁZQUEZ GARDETA
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Public ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Eu

LABURPENA: Giza Eskubideen Europako Auzitegiaren Negrepontis-Giannisis vs. Grezia epaiak atzerriko erabakiak libre zirkulatzeko bidea zabaldu du, prozesu zuzen bat izateko eskubidetik etorria, Giza Eskubideen Europako Hitzarmeneko 6.1 artikuluan aitortua. GEEAren jurisprudentzia-lerro horren eboluzioa abiatzen da Wagner eta J.M.W.L. vs. Luxenburgo eta McDonald vs. Frantzia erabakiekin, baina guk aipatzen duguna aurrerapausoa handia da, eskubidea ez zaiolako lotzen beste zuzenbide substantibo bati, eta berezko eskubidea dela planteatzen da. Gainera, ohar aipagarriak egiten dira atzerriko epai judizialak geldiarazteko ordena publikoko salbuespenari buruz, eta haien eragina leuntzen da. Oso interesgarria da EBko arautegien aplikazio-esparrutik ihes egiten duten erabakietan aplikatzeko, non exequaturra desagertzen den ad hoc prozedura gisa, baina eragindako alderdiak hura ez aitortzeko aukera mantentzen da. Ildo horretan, GEEAk Negrepontis-en erabilitako argudioak garrantzi berezikoak dira, kontuan hartuz GEEHk inspiratzen duela Batasuneko Zuzenbidea eta auzitegiak egiten duen artikuluen interpretazioa. RESUMEN: El Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos abre en su sentencia Negrepontis-Giannisis c. Grecia una vía de ampliación de las posibilidades a la libre circulación de decisiones extranjeras como un derecho derivado del derecho a un proceso equitativo reconocido en el art. 6.1 del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos. La evolución de esta línea jurisprudencial del TEDH arranca con las decisiones Wagner y J.M.W.L. c. Luxemburgo y McDonald c. Francia pero en la que nos ocupa se produce un avance considerable porque no se ata el derecho al reconocimiento a otro derecho sustantivo sino que se plantea como un derecho en sí mismo. Además se establecen notables consideraciones en cuanto a la excepción de orden público como freno a la ejecución de decisiones judiciales extranjeras y se suaviza su efecto. Es especialmente interesante para su aplicación en aquellas decisiones que escapan del ámbito de aplicación de los correspondientes reglamentos de la UE donde desaparece el exequátur como procedimiento ad hoc pero se mantiene la posibilidad de oposición al reconocimiento por la parte afectada. En este sentido, los argumentos utilizados por el TEDH en Negrepontis son de especial relevancia, teniendo en cuenta el carácter inspirador del Derecho de la Unión que tiene el CEDH y por ende de la interpretación que dicho tribunal haga de su articulado. ABSTRACT: The European Court of Human Rights in its judgment Negrepontis-Giannisis v. Greece opens the extension of the possibilities for a free movement of foreign decisions as a right derived from the right to a fair hearing of article 6.1 of the European Convention of Human Rights. The evolution of this case law trend of the ECHR begins with decisions Wagner and J.M.W.L. v. Luxembourg and McDonald v. France but in the judgment we are now analyzing a considerable development is made because the right to the recognizition is not linked to other substantive right but it is considered as a right itself. Besides remarkable considerations are established as far as the exception to the public order is concerned as a brake to the execution of foreign judicial decisions and it softens its effect. It is especially interesting for its application in those decisions that go beyond the scope of application of the corresponding regulations of the EU where the exequatur as an ad hoc procedure is missing but it maintains the possibility of opposition to the recognizition by the affected party. In this sense, the reasoning of the ECHR in Negrepontis is of special relevance, taking into account the inspiring character of the European Law forthe ECHR and hence the interpretation of that Tribunal of its articles.

Discriminación racial y ejercicio del derecho a la instrucción en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. El caso de la minoría gitana

2012 ◽  
pp. 247-291
Author(s):  
Lucía CASADO CASADO
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right

LABURPENA: Lan honetan, lehen-lehenik, hurbilpen orokor bat egingo dugu Giza Eskubideak eta Oinarrizko Askatasunak Babesteko Europako Hitzarmenak jasotzen dituen diskriminazio-debekuaren eta hezkuntzarako eskubidearen eraketari; eta ondoren, arraza-diskriminazioaren debekuak hezkuntzarako eskubidearekin duen lotura aztertuko dugu, Giza Eskubideen Europako Auzitegiaren jurisprudentziaren esparruan. Horretarako, eremu horretako lau epai esanguratsuri helduko diegu: Giza Eskubideak eta beste batzuk Txekiar Errepublikaren aurka kasua, bi epai sortarazi dituena (bata Bigarren Sekzioarena, eta bestea Sala Nagusiarena); Sampanis eta beste batzuk Greziaren aurka kasua, eta Orsus eta beste batzuk Kroaziaren aurka kasua. Kasu horietan planteatzen den auzia da ea estatu jakin batzuek ijito etniako umeak eskolaratzeko abiarazi dituzten neurriak diskriminatzaileak diren ala ez. Horretaz gainera, gogoeta batzuk egingo ditugu alor horretako jurisprudentziaren bilakaeraz eta beraren ondorioez. RESUMEN: este trabajo, tras realizar una aproximación general a la configuración de la prohibición de discriminación y al derecho a la instrucción en el Convenio Europeo para la protección de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales, analiza la prohibición de discriminación racial en conexión con el ejercicio del derecho a la instrucción en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Para ello, examina cuatro sentencias relevantes recaídas en este ámbito (casos D.H. y otros contra República Checa, que ha dado lugar a dos sentencias —una de la Sección 2.ª y otra de la Gran Sala—; Sampanis y otros contra Grecia; y Orsus y otros contra Croacia), en las que se plantea si las medidas adoptadas por determinados Estados en relación con la escolarización de niños de etnia gitana son o no discriminatorias. También se realizan algunas consideraciones en torno a la evolución jurisprudencial en este ámbito y sus consecuencias. ABSTRACT: After a general approximation to the configuration of the prohibition of discrimination and of the right of instruction by the European Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, this work analyzes the prohibition of racial discrimination in relation with the exercise of the right of instruction within the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. For this purpose, four relevant judgments on the subject (cases D.H and others against the Czech Republic, which produced two rulings: one by the Second section and other by the Grand Chamber; Sampanis against Greece; and Orsus and others against Croatia) where it arose whether the measures adopted by some States in relation to the schooling of kids from the gypsy ethnic group are or not discriminatory are studied. Some considerations regarding the evolution by the case law regarding this area are also carried out and their consequences.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document