The European Court of Human Rights: Catan and Others v. Moldova and Russia

2013 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 217-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Arno Hessbruegge
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Language Education ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Human Rights Violations ◽  
Right To Education ◽  
Republic Of Moldova ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right

On October 19, 2012, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (the Court) ruled that policies pursued by de facto authorities in the Transdniestrian region of the Republic of Moldova aimed at suppressing Moldovan-language education violated the right to education of the affected children and their parents. The Court held Russia responsible for these violations by virtue of the continued vital support Russia provides to the de facto authorities. Meanwhile, the Court found Moldova to have complied with residual human rights obligations it retained, despite lacking effective control over Transdniestria. This important judgment develops the jurisprudence of the Court in relation to human rights violations arising from conduct of de facto authorities. However, it does not fully clarify the standards the Court applies in attributing their conduct to third states.

Ždanoka v. Latvia – European Court of Human Rights

2007 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-323 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.G. Hoogers
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
20Th Century ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Member States ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
To Come ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right

On March 16, 2006, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered its final judgment in the case of Tatjana Ždanoka against the Republic of Latvia. Although not the first decision under Article 3 of the first Protocol, the Ždanoka v. Latvia case was important, because it allowed the Court to come to a decision on an aspect of Article 3, first Protocol, which in earlier case law had not extensively been dealt with by the ECtHR: the right to be elected. Moreover, the case allowed the Court to make some statements of principle on another question with which numerous member states of the Council have been dealing throughout the 20th century: how far may a democracy go in protecting itself from (allegedly) undemocratic parties, groups or individuals?

Al-Skeini v. United Kingdom

2012 ◽  
Vol 106 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miša Zgonec-Rožej
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Effective Control ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right

In Al-Skeini v. United Kingdom, decided on July 7, 2011, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg (the Court) found that the human rights obligations of the United Kingdom applied to its actions in Iraq and that the United Kingdom had violated Article 2 (right to life) of the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (Convention or ECHR) by failing to investigate the circumstances of the deaths of the relatives of five of the six applicants. The case deals with the extraterritorial application in Iraq of the Convention, which is part of UK domestic law by virtue of the Human Rights Act, 1998, and involves the concepts of jurisdiction, effective control, and the scope of the right to life.

Advancing Economic and Social Rights, Including Education in the Context of European Minorities—2019

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-87
Author(s):  
Mariya Riekkinen
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Psychiatric Treatment ◽  
Language Education ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Right To Education ◽  
International Treaty ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Diversity In Education ◽  
Rights Issues

This article reviews international developments which took place in 2019 with a focus on economic and social rights of members of European minorities, including the right to education. The developments are reviewed based on the practice of the UN, CoE, as well as EU organizations and their bodies whose activities relate to human rights issues. This review also covers the documents of the said bodies adopted in 2018 yet having remained non- promulgated until 2019. In a nutshell, probably the most significant developments— in terms not only of the greater number of cases resolved but also of new rules proclaimed— occurred within the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). In particular, the ECtHR used the notion of ‘institutional racism’ in connection with police violence against Roma individuals in the case Lingurar v. Romania. The Court also articulated an extremely limited ratione materiae right to obtaining psychiatric treatment in a minority language in Rooman v. Belgium. Advancements include developments at unesco which adopted the first- ever international treaty on higher education and continued efforts in approximating diversity in education by elaborating on multi- language education.

Battles Over Symbols: The “Religion” of the Minority Versus the “Culture” of the Majority

2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori G. Beaman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Religious Symbol ◽  
Anti Semitism ◽  
European Tradition ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right

Moreover, with the benefit of hindsight, it is easy to identify in the constant central core of Christian faith, despite the inquisition, despite anti-Semitism and despite the crusades, the principles of human dignity, tolerance and freedom, including religious freedom, and therefore, in the last analysis, the foundations of the secular State.A European court should not be called upon to bankrupt centuries of European tradition. No court, certainly not this Court, should rob the Italians of part of their cultural personality.In March, 2011, after five years of working its way through various levels of national and European courts, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights decided that a crucifix hanging at the front of a classroom did not violate the right to religious freedom under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Specifically, Ms. Soile Lautsi had complained that the presence of the crucifix violated her and her children's right to religious freedom and that its presence amounted to an enforced religious regime. The Grand Chamber, reversing the lower Chamber's decision, held that while admittedly a religious symbol, the crucifix also represented the cultural heritage of Italians.

scholarly journals Exercising the right to a trial in a reasonable time in the Republic of Serbia

2007 ◽  
Vol 79 (9) ◽  
pp. 311-333
Author(s):  
Maja Omeragić-Pantić ◽  
Biljana Vujičić ◽  
Bojan Tubić ◽  
Rodoljub Etinski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Current Status ◽  
National Strategy ◽  
Reasonable Time ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
The Right

Constitution and procedural laws explicitly guarantee right to a trial in a reasonable time. The procedural laws have been changed and some new solutions, which have to enable a trial in a reasonable time, were adopted. The Decision on establishing of national strategy of judicature reform was adopted, in order to make the judicature more efficient. However, the inquiries show that there are still some significant disadvantages which affect the right to a trial in a reasonable time. Despite the new legislative solutions, adopted in order to accelerate the trials, some of these solutions are not completely sufficient or their implementation in practice is not entirely adequate. The Decision on establishing of national strategy of judicature reform sets up the right analysis of the current status, as well as "therapy for the healing" of judicature. However, it seems that current measures are not in accordance with this therapy. Technical modernization of the courts is very slow and personal capacities, on the level of the associates, is declining instead of getting stronger. The biggest disadvantage of the present legal system, regarding the right to a trial in a reasonable time is the absence of the efficient legal remedies with which the party could accelerate the judicial procedure, respectively with which it could give damages caused by the breach of this right. This paper shows how strict are the criteria of the European court of human rights in Strasbourg related to it and that the existing legal remedies in our legal system are not sufficient to meet these demands. The confirmation of this conclusion came from Strasbourg, when this paper was already written, in the judgment V.A.M. v. Serbia of March 13, 2007.

Overruling ‘the Salduz Doctrine’ in Beuze v Belgium: The ECtHR’s further retreat from the Salduz principles on the right to access to lawyer

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 342-362
Author(s):  
Ergul Celiksoy
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
European Court ◽  
Increasing Trend ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

In November 2018, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in the case of Beuze v Belgium. Relying on Ibrahim and Others v the United Kingdom, the Grand Chamber held that the Salduz principles require a two-stage test of analysis, and hence, ruled out that systematic statutory restriction of a general and mandatory nature would in itself constitute an automatic violation of Article 6 § 3(c) of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, the Beuze judgment appears to be very controversial, since the Grand Chamber failed to put forward any convincing reason why it departed from previous case law, particularly Dayanan v Turkey and other judgments against Turkey. In their separate opinion, the concurring Judges in Beuze were concerned that the Beuze judgment overruled ‘ Salduz itself and all other cases that have applied the Salduz test’, and thus, ‘actually distorts and changes the Salduz principle and devalues the right that the Court established previously’. This article analyses the Beuze judgment in the light of the Court’s recent jurisprudence in order to examine whether it contradicts and dilutes the principles previously set out. Further, it discusses the implications of the new standards established in Ibrahim and Others and in subsequent cases, particularly Beuze. Particular attention is paid to the questions of how ‘fair’ is the application of overall fairness assessment in every case, how may the Court’s changing direction of approach concerning the right to access to a lawyer affect the increasing trend of recognition thereof, as a rule, by the contracting states, and finally, to what extent the new principles, especially those established in Beuze, comply with Directive 2013/48/EU on the right of access to a lawyer.

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

2013 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 417-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irini Papanicolopulu
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
International Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
Maritime Search And Rescue ◽  
The Right

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.

scholarly journals Free legal aid in the context of the right of access to court

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (89) ◽  
pp. 65-82
Author(s):  
Dušica Palačković ◽  
Jelena Čanović
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Level ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Quality Level ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Legal Aid ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Access

The Constitution of the Republic of Serbia explicitly regulates that free legal aid shall be stipulated by the law. In a series of reports on the progress of the Republic of Serbia in the process of joining the EU, there are warnings about the unacceptably low quality level and efficiency of the judiciary, and indications that there is a need to regulate the legal aid system. Finally, this matter was regulated by enacting the Legal Aid Act of the Republic of Serbia, which came into force on 1st October 2019. In addition to the conceptual definition of legal aid, the paper analyzes the right of access to court as a constituent element of the right to a fair trial prescribed in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which entails the right to legal aid. The regulation of legal aid at the national level has to meet the standards formulated at the European Union level as well as the standards formulated through the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. In that context, the paper analyzes the regulations and decisions, i.e. the widely recognized and accepted standards. The Legal Aid Act of the Republic of Serbia has been analyzed in the context of meeting these standards, especially in relation to the conditions for granting the right to legal aid and the circle of beneficiaries and providers of certain types of legal aid.

scholarly journals Legal Regulation of Relations in the Field of Education

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 9035-9038
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Right To Education ◽  
National Education ◽  
Education Legislation ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The article analyzes the specifics of ensuring the protection of the right to education in case-law decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. The authors have found that there are problems in the current education systems both in Europe and Russia. These problems are solved in accordance with the case law created by the European Court of Human Rights making decisions to ensure the right to education. The authors have noted the main violations committed by governments or governmental bodies in its implementation. The authors have shown the correspondence of the norms of national education legislation of a number of European countries to the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights. In this regard, the authors have concluded that today, the right to education in European states is not always respected due to migration policy and in the future, relations in this area will deteriorate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document