scholarly journals Derechos sociales de prestación y obligaciones positivas del Estado en la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos // Social Rights of assistance and positive obligations of the State in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (100) ◽  
pp. 1209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Encarna Carmona Cuenca
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Social Benefits ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Social ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

Resumen:El Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos no reconoce expresamente los derechos sociales de prestación (a excepción del derecho a la educación). A pesar de ello, el Tribunal de Estrasburgo ha realizado una interpretación extensiva de los derechos civiles y políticos reconocidos para incluir, de diversas formas, la protección de aquellos derechos. Una de las técnicas utilizadas ha sido la doctrina de las obligaciones positivas del Estado. Aunque el Tribunal ha aplicado esta doctrina, fundamentalmente, a los derechos civiles y políticos, podemos encontrar algunas resoluciones en las que establece determinadas obligaciones positivas estatales para proteger derechos como la protección de la salud, la vivienda, la protección social o la protección de las personas con discapacidad. En general, se trata de reconocimientos generales y poco concretos pero, en algunos casos, ha detallado cuáles son estas obligaciones. Esto lo ha hecho, en primer lugar, en casos en que se habían producido daños cuya responsabilidad era directa o indirectamente del Estado. En segundo lugar, cuando se trataba de personas que se encontraban bajo la tutela del Estado, como las personas detenidas o internas en prisiones. Y, en tercer lugar, cuando los afectados eran personas especialmente vulnerables (discapacitados o pertenecientes a la minoría gitana). Aunque se trata de una interpretación incipiente y poco desarrollada, muestra un camino en el que se debería profundizar en el futuro. Es generalmente admitido que son los Estados quienes deben tener la iniciativa en el diseño y establecimiento de los derechos sociales de prestación pero, en caso de conductas y omisiones estatales manifiestamente contrarias a los estándares internacionales, el Tribunal Europeo debería obligar a los Estados mediante sus sentencias a dictar una legislación o establecer políticas que hagan efectivos estos derechos.El artículo consta de una introducción, cuatro epígrafes de contenido y una conclusión final. En el segundo epígrafe se aborda la cuestión de la problemática justiciabilidad de los derechos sociales de prestación. En el tercero se hace referencia a la doctrina de las obligaciones positivas del Estado en la jurisprudencia del TEDH. En el cuarto se apuntan las principales técnicas que ha utilizado el TEDH para proteger los derechos sociales de prestación y, en particular, la extensión del contenido de algunos derechos civiles y políticos. En el quinto epígrafe se analiza cómo se ha utilizado la técnica de las obligacionespositivas del Estado en la protección de los derechos sociales de prestación y, en concreto, del derecho a la protección de la salud y del derecho a la vivienda.Summary:1. Introduction. 2. The social rights of assistance and its problematic justiciability. 3. The positive obligations of the state in the case lawof the ECtHR. 4. The protection techniques of the social rights of assistance in the case law of the ECtHR. 4.1. General approach. 4.2. Application of the prohibition of discrimination of article 14 ECtHR to certain social benefits. 4.3. Extension of the content of several rights recognized in the Convention. 5. In particular: the protection of social rights of assistance through the doctrine of the positive obligations of the state. 5.1. The right to health protection. 5.2. Theright to housing. 6. By way of conclusion.Abstract:The European Convention on Human Rights does not expressly recognize any social rights of assistance (except the right to education). In spite of this, the Strasbourg Court has made a broad interpretation of recognized civil and political rights to include, in different ways, the protection of those rights. One of the techniques used by the Court has been the doctrine of the State's positive obligations under the ECHR. Although the Court has essentially applied this doctrine to the civil and political rights, we can find some resolutions in which it establishes certain positive state obligations to protect rights such as protection of health, housing, social benefits or protection of people with disabilities. Generally, these are general and not very specific recognitions, but in some cases, they have detailed what these obligations are.Firstly, this has been done in cases where there was damage which was directly or indirectly the responsibility of the State. Secondly, regarding people who were under the protection of the State, such as persons detained or interned in prisons. And, thirdly, when those affected were particularly vulnerable (disabled or belonging to the Roma minority). Although it is an incipient and underdeveloped interpretation, it shows a way in which should be further deepened. It is generally accepted that it is the States that must take the initiative in designing and establishing social rights of assistance but, inthe case of state conduct and omissions that are manifestly contrary to international standards, the European Court should oblige States with their judgements to enact legislation or develop policies to give effect to these rights.The article consists of an introduction, four content epigraphs and a final conclusion. The second section deals with the question of the problematic justiciability of social rights of assistance. The third refers to the doctrine of the positive obligations of the State in the Case Law of the ECtHR. The fourth section outlines the main techniques used by the ECtHR to protect the social rights of assistance and, in particular, expanding the scope of some civil and political rights. The fifth section analyzes the use of the technique of positive obligationsof the State in the protection of social rights of assistance and, in particular, the right to protection of health and the right to housing.

scholarly journals Dano and Alimanovic: the recent evolution of CJEU caselaw on EU citizenship and cross-border access to social benefits

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-80
Author(s):  
Rui Lanceiro
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Social Benefits ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Member States ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right

Since its inception, the concept of EU citizenship, as well as the rights and duties deriving therefrom, has evolved considerably, particularly in the area of social rights. ECJ case law has played a central role in defining the right of EU citizens to access social benefits in the host Member States, which meant a decrease in their degree of discretion to restrict the access to national social securities systems. However, the recent Dano and Alimanovic judgments represent a significant change from previous case-law, setting limits on the right of EU citizens to social benefits in the host Member States. The right of residence in another Member State appears to be dependent on the status of a worker citizen in accordance with the new methodology in order to avoid being an excessive burden on the social system of the host Member State. However, the new approach still leaves several unanswered questions. Were these decisions an attempt to address the “social security tourism” debate? Is the CJEU falling behind with regard to the protection of social rights? What will remain of previous jurisprudence?

THE BOUNDARIES PROBLEM OF THE 1950 EUROPEAN CONVENTION DYNAMIC INTERPRETATION ON HUMAN RIGHTS ON THE EXAMPLE OF ENSURING THE SOCIAL RIGHTS OF CONVICTS

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 112-125
Author(s):  
Andrew Yu. KLYUCHNIKOV
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Current Approach ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Dynamic Interpretation ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact

The 1950 Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is an instrument for the dynamic development of the human rights system in the member states of the European Council. Such an active formation of the latter is due to the activities of the European Court of Human Rights. However, the case-law of the court is not always accepted in national jurisdictions, especially when it comes to the most sensitive areas of life in modern societies. As the goal of the research, the author sets out the identification of the current approach of this international court to the problem of social rights of convicts, especially in the context of ensuring their social rights. The material for the research was the case-law of the ECHR on the social rights of citizens - with special attention to the rights of persons in places of isolation from society, the legal positions of domestic researchers on the problem posed. The author uses traditional research methods - general scientific and special, with an emphasis on historical, social and legal methods. The paper describes the stages of the international soft law sources formation on penitentiary rules and the impact on this of the ECHR practice in the context of the discrimination standarts prohibition regarding the right of ownership and violation of the forced (compulsory) labor prohibition. A common European standard “the right of a convicted person to retire” has not yet been developed, which has been confirmed in the practice of the ECHR. This decision is due to the need to maintain the effectiveness of the entire convention system, the policy of compromises with states. Through the dynamic interpretation of the ECHR, this right is recognized as an element of the convention rights protection, the convict should be granted an increasing amount of social rights.

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 Right to Enter One’s Own Country: The Conflict between the Jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee and the Travaux Préparatoires of Article 12(4) of the iccpr

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-123
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right

Abstract Article 12(4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr) provides that ‘[n]o one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.’ The jurisprudence of the Human Rights Committee shows that Committee members have often disagreed on the question of whether the right under Article 12(4) is reserved for citizens only or it can be claimed by non-citizens who consider the countries in which they were born or they have lived for longer periods as their own. In its earlier case law, the Committee held that Article 12(4) is applicable to nationals only. Since 1999, when General Comment No.27 was adopted, the Committee has moved towards extending the right under Article 12(4) to non-nationals. Its latest case law appears to have supported the Committee’s position that Article 12(4) is applicable to non-nationals. Central to both majority and minority decisions in which the Committee has dealt with Article 12(4), is whether the travaux préparatoires of Article 12(4) support either view. This article relies on the travaux préparatoires of Article 12(4) to argue that it does not support the view that Article 12(4) is applicable to non-nationals.

scholarly journals THE RIGHT TO VOTE FOR NON-RESIDENT CITIZENS IN EUROPE

2016 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 859-894 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Lappin
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Right ◽  
European Court ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Right To Vote ◽  
The Right ◽  
Political Right

AbstractThe right to vote is the most important political right in international human rights law. Framed within the broader right of political participation, it is the only right in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights not guaranteed as a universal human right but rather as a citizen's right. While limitations on the right to vote are permissible in respect of citizenship and age, residency-based restrictions are not explicitly provided. However, recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights endorse a view that voting rights may be conditioned on residency on the grounds of an individual's bond to their country-of-origin and the extent to which laws passed by that government would affect them. This article questions this proposition and explores whether disenfranchisement based solely on residency constitutes an unreasonable and discriminatory restriction to the essence of the right.

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.

scholarly journals NEPRUŽANJE ZDRAVSTVENE SKRBI KAO POVREDA ČLANKA 3. EUROPSKE KONVENCIJE S POSEBNIM OSVRTOM NA PRAKSU SUDA U PREDMETIMA IZVAN KONTEKSTA ZADRŽAVANJA

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-104
Author(s):  
Maša Marochini Zrinski ◽  
Karin Derenčin Vukušić
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Right To Health ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Right To Health Care ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Right ◽  
Political Character

The European Convention on Human Rights, as a main Council of Europe instrument for the protection of civil and political rights, does not guarantee the right to health care. However, the European Court of Human Rights broadly interprets Convention rights, and within the context of Articles 2, 3 and 8 of the Convention it gave certain indications that it might start dealing with the issue of health care. Without going into details of all the mentioned articles, this paper will analyse cases where the Court dealt with the issue of violation of Article 3 due to non-provision of health care outside the context of detention. Namely, within the context of detention, there is a clear obligation for states to provide health care, and the Court often relies on the reports of the Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. What we consider important to point out is the Court’s case-law on providing health care outside the context of detention, given the social character of the right to health care, which goes beyond the civil and political character of the Convention.

scholarly journals The 2013 Elections in Zimbabwe: End of an Era for Human Rights Discourse?

2013 ◽  
Vol 48 (3) ◽  
pp. 99-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cornelias Ncube
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
The State ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Coalition Government ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Strained State ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
Rights Discourse ◽  
The Right ◽  
Human Rights Discourse

This paper examines the implications of Zimbabwe's 2013 harmonised elections on the opposition's continued deployment of the rights-based discourse to make moral and political claims against and demands of the state. Since 2000, two polarising strands of the human rights discourse −1) the right to self-determination and 2) civil and political rights – were deployed by the state and the opposition, respectively, in order to challenge extant relations and structures of power. The acutely strained state–society relations in post-2000 Zimbabwe emanated from human rights violations by the state as it responded to challenges to its political power and legitimacy. However, the relative improvement in the human rights situation in the country since the 2009 coalition government came into office, and during and since the recently concluded peaceful 2013 elections – the flawed electoral process itself notwithstanding – suggests a need for alternative new ways to make moral and political demands of the state in the future.

Property Restitution in Eastern Europe: Domestic and International Human Rights Law Responses

2004 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-363 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariana Karadjova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Eastern Europe ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
Civil And Political Rights ◽  
The Right ◽  
Past Injustices

AbstractThis article presents an overview of how those East European countries that are members of the Council of Europe have approached the problems of restitution as a means of reparation for past injustices. In doing so, attention will be paid to: the entitled persons and the extent of restitution; the underlying motivations vis-à-vis the form of reparation (restitution in kind or compensation), and attitudes towards minority groups and foreigners as part of the restitution process. Emphasis will also be given to the role played by international instruments (the ECHR and its future Protocol 12, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, various UN resolutions, etc), as well as by judicial institutions (the European Court of Human Rights, the UN Human Rights Committee) in the evolution of the restitution process in Eastern Europe in general, and regarding such issues as equality between foreigners and nationals as well as minority and religious groups and the elaboration of an international standard of restitution as reparation for abuses of human rights in particular. The bodies of the ECHR have managed to avoid problems related to restitution and reparations for past injustices by arguing that the right of restitution is not guaranteed by art.1 of Protocol 1 to the the ECHR. But the entry into force of a new Protocol 12 to the Convention will likely result in changes being made in this thought process, at least as regards the position of foreigners. If measures denying restitution, owing to the claimant's nationality, were taken after ratifi cation of Protocol 12, the way should be opened in the future to foreigners (in addition to procedures before the UN Human Rights Committee) to more effectively defend their rights relative to such restorative measures: notably, the possibility of seizing the Strasbourg Court with claims relating to justifi cation for "unequal treatment". The right to remedy the injustices committed to the victims of violations of human rights and international humanitarian law has appeared with increasing frequency on the agenda of the UN Commission on Human Rights. Furthermore, in its recent case law, the UN Human Rights Committee has evidenced a concern over several questions relating to the respect of possessions; it has already opted for the proposition that any discrimination on the basis of nationality in restitution legislation can be deemed to be a violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Lastly, after ratifi cation of Protocol 12, we can expect a link to be forged between the vision of the UN Commission on Human Rights and that of the European Court of Human Rights that may—in the future—lead to the elaboration of a common international mechanism regulating restitution as a means for the reparation of abuses of human rights.

Contours of a European Social Union in the Case-Law of the European Court of Justice

2006 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 101-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koen Lenaerts ◽  
Tinne Heremans
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Principle ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Social ◽  
Welfare Systems ◽  
National Welfare

Tensions between national welfare systems and the social rights of the citizens of the Union — Fundamental principle of free movement and the degree of financial solidarity with nationals from other Member States — Introduction of internal market principles in health care — The balancing role of the Court of Justice of the European Communities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document