scholarly journals Alcance del artículo 3 del convenio europeo de derechos humanos en relación con la detención de un menor extranjero no acompañado : la obligación positiva de no dejarle en desamparo = The detention of foreigners unaccompanied children in Europe : considerations around Rahimi vs. Greece , (ECHR, 2011)

2013 ◽  
pp. 481 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Manuel López Ulla
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Detention Center ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
Unaccompanied Children ◽  
European Court ◽  
El Sistema ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
First Time

La Unión Europea y el Consejo de Europa han recordado recientemente la obligación que tienen sus Estados miembros de mejorar el sistema de garantías respecto de los menores extranjeros no acompañados. En este trabajo nos centramos en los derechos del menor detenido. Nos anima a ello la Sentencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos en el caso Rahimi c. Grecia (2011), que por vez primera califica como trato inhumano o degradante no asistir a un menor cuando, dictada la orden de expulsión, éste sale del Centro de internamiento. Al mismo tiempo, en el último trienio, las dos organizaciones anteriormente citadas han reconocido abiertamente el incumplimiento que en la práctica se observa de las obligaciones que se derivan del Convenio de Naciones Unidas sobre los Derechos del Niño y la necesidad de articular un procedimiento marco que garantice los derechos de este grupo especialmente vulnerable cuando son detenidos a causa de la irregularidad de su situación administrativa.The European Union and the Council of Europe have reminded its Member States that it is necessary to improve the protection of unaccopanied foreing minors. In particular, we are going to study in this paper the rights of detainees. Concerning this matter, we consider of a remarkable interest the rule of the European Court of Human Rights in Rahimi v. Greece (2011): it has been the first time that the Court has considered as a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) when an unaccompanied minor is neglected by national authorities after being released without any kind of protection from a detention center. At the same time, the documents that in this paper we have studied —approved from 2010 to 2012— explicitly recognize that in Europe have not yet been adopted the measures required to protect effectively the rights recognized in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989), and that it necessary to promote the adoption of procedures to safeguard the administrative and judicial protection of these children.

scholarly journals Las cláusulas de restricción en el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos

2021 ◽  
pp. 469
Author(s):  
Lara Redondo Saceda
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
El Sistema ◽  
The Impact

El presente trabajo pretende analizar el sistema de restricciones al ejercicio de los derechos previsto en los artículos 8 a 11 del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Así, el objetivo principal es reflexionar sobre la incidencia de estas cláusulas de restricción, su desarrollo jurisprudencial por parte del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos y su significado en la construcción del sistema de derechos humanos del Consejo de Europa.This paper is intended to analyse the system of restrictions on the exercise of rights provided by articles 8 to 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Thus, the principal aim is reflecting on the impact of these restriction clauses, their case-law development by the European Court of Human Rights and their meaning on the construction of the Council of Europe Human Rights System.

scholarly journals El diálogo entre el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos y los tribunales constitucionales en la construcción de un orden público europeo

2012 ◽  
pp. 183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier García Roca
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Legal Doctrine ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
High Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
El Sistema ◽  
Constitutional Pluralism

Asistimos a un proceso de influencia recíproca sobre derechos entre altos tribunales. Distintas jurisdicciones —ordinaria, constitucional, convencional y de la Unión— concurren al servicio de la integración europea mediante la garantía efectiva de unos derechos comunes y vienen obligadas a elaborar interpretaciones compatibles. Los derechos fundamentales son un ingrediente de un orden público democrático y el CEDH opera como un instrumento constitucional al servicio de ese orden. La idea de diálogo judicial es un instrumento flexible y ambiguo, y, precisamente por ello, muy útil para organizar un trabajo en red en este escenario de pluralismo constitucional. Si bien no es claro qué quiere decirse con «diálogo», puede que de esta ambigüedad sea mejor no salir dado el amplio círculo de los destinatarios. Los tribunales constitucionales deben actuar como interlocutores del TEDH y, al tiempo, como mediadores, divulgando la jurisprudencia europea y haciéndola compatible con las jurisprudencias constitucionales mediante una interpretación conforme. Sería muy conveniente acomodar los parámetros constitucionales de derechos, mediante su reforma, al mínimo que entraña el sistema del Convenio. Debemos explicar con mayor profundidad las diversas relaciones que se engloban bajo la inclusiva denominación de diálogo.We are witnessing a process of influence and cross-fertilization in human rights between high courts. Several jurisdictions —domestic, constitutional, European Court and Court of Justice— cooperate in European integration in order to achieve collective enforcement of rights and therefore compatible interpretationsmust be constructed. Fundamental rights are an ingredient of a European and democratic public order, and the European Convention on Human Rights must work as a constitutional instrument of this order. The idea of judicial dialogue is such a flexible and ambiguous device that it becomes very useful for organizing a network in this scenario of constitutional pluralism. Nevertheless it is not at all clear what the expression «dialogue » means, however it is probably better not to go very much into detail because of the wide number of member States which have to understand it. Constitutional Courts should act as partners of the European Court of Human Rights and also as mediators, spreading European legal doctrine and making it compatible with their own constitutional doctrines by means of an interpretation secundum conventionem. It would be convenient to reform constitutional parameters in order to harmonize their internal standards with the system of the Convention. But we should go further and explain in detail the different relationships which are included under the word «dialogue».

scholarly journals Contra la normalización de la ilegalidad: la protección judicial de los extranjeros frente a las expulsiones colectivas y las devoluciones “en caliente” | Against the Normalization of Illegality: the Judicial Protection of Foreigners Facing Collective Expulsions and Police “Push-Backs”

2017 ◽  
pp. 195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ángeles Solanes Corella
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Critical Analysis ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Migration Flows ◽  
Judicial Protection

Resumen: Las expulsiones colectivas de extranjeros, aun estando prohibidas por el derecho internacional, son una práctica que sistemáticamente se ha aplicado en el ámbito del control de los flujos migratorios. En el caso de España, en su frontera sur terrestre, se han generalizado las denominadas “devoluciones en caliente”. Las vulneraciones de derechos que conllevan estas medidas son incompatibles con el Convenio Europeo para la Protección de los Derechos Humanos y de las Libertades Fundamentales, del que derivan obligaciones concretas para los Estados parte. Este trabajo, propone un análisis crítico de la jurisprudencia del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos para delimitar cuándo se produce una expulsión colectiva. Con ello se pretende evitar la aparente normalización de una medida que es ilegal e insistir en los mecanismos garantistas de los derechos de los extranjeros. Abstract: The collective expulsion of foreigners, although prohibited by International Law, is a practice that has been systematically applied in the field of control of migration flows. In the case of Spain, on its southern land border, the so-called police "push-backs" have become widespread. The violations of rights entailed by these measures are incompatible with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, from which obligations derive for the States Parties. This paper proposes a critical analysis of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights to delimit when a collective expulsion occurs. This is intended to avoid the apparent normalization of a measure that is illegal and to insist on mechanisms that guarantee the rights of foreigners.

scholarly journals El margen nacional de apreciación y el contenido de la libertad de pensamiento, conciencia y religión en el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos = The national margin of appreciation and the content of freedom of thought, conscience and religion in the European Convention on Human Rights

2019 ◽  
pp. 68
Author(s):  
Sergio Alejandro Fernández Parra
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
Frequent Use ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
El Sistema ◽  
Freedom Of Thought ◽  
The Right ◽  
Margin Control

Resumen: En el presente escrito se estudiará la figura del margen nacional de apreciación y su aplicación por parte del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Este estudio tiene como objeto demostrar que la utilización frecuente de esta figura impide que exista una interpretación uniforme del derecho a la libertad de pensamiento, conciencia y religión en el Sistema Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Para probar la hipótesis planteada, la figura aludida será comparada con el control de convencionalidad y la forma en que se ha aplicado esta última figura por parte de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Esto último se realizará con el fin de evidenciar las falencias interpretativas y de protección de los derechos que genera la utilización del margen nacional de apreciación. Palabras clave: margen nacional de apreciación, control de convencionalidad, Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, libertad de pensamiento, conciencia y religión, Estado laico. Abstract: This paper will study the figure of the national margin of appreciation and its application by the European Court of Human Rights. The purpose of this study is to show that the frequent use of this figure prevents a uniform interpretation of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion in the European System of Human Rights. To test this hypothesis, the aforementioned figure will be compared with the control of conventionality and the way in which the latter figure has been applied by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The latter in order to highlight the interpretative and protection flaws of the rights generated by the use of the national margin of appreciation. Keywords: National appreciation margin, control of conventionality, European Court of Human Rights, Inter-American Court of Human Rights, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, secular State.

scholarly journals La evolución del sistema europeo de protección de derechos humanos

2019 ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Luis López Guerra
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Second Phase ◽  
Main Role ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
Third Phase ◽  
European Court ◽  
European System ◽  
El Sistema ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights

El sistema europeo de protección de derechos humanos resultante del Convenio Europeo de 1950 ha experimentado una notable evolución desde su creación, tanto en oo que se refiere a su extensión como a sus objetivos y procedimientos. Al menos tres fases son visibles en esa evolución; una primera fase, inicialmente orientada a una colaboración interestatal, protagonizada por la Comisión Europea de Derechos Humanos; una segunda fase, centrada en la protección individualizada de los derechos del Convenio por el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos; y finalmente, parecería apuntarse una tercera, caracterizada por la incipiente adopción de una función cuasi-constitucional del Tribunal de Estrasburgo.The European system of protection of human rights created by the European Convention of 1950 has been subject of a deep evolution since its creation, concerning both its extension and its goals and proceedings. Three phases aat least are visible in this evolution: a first phase, initially oriented to an inter-State collaboration, where the main role corresponded to the European Comission of Human Rights; a second phase, centered on the individualised protection of Convention rights by the European Court of Humna Rights; and finally, ir seems that a third phase is starting, in which the Strasbourg Court is assuming a quasi-constitutional function.

scholarly journals TEDH ante la violencia contra la mujer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maite Carretero Sanjuan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Gender Violence ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
History Of ◽  
Degrading Treatment ◽  
First Time

El Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos (TEDH), como máxima autoridad para la garantía de los derechos humanos y libertades fundamentales en Europa, tiene como finalidad específica la de garantizar el cumplimiento del Convenio Europeo de Protección de los Derechos Humanos y Libertades Fundamentales (CEDH), firmado en Roma, el 4 de noviembre de 1950. Si bien este texto, en sí, no contiene una regulación de específica protección para los casos de violencia de género y otros tipos de violencia contra la mujer, la casuística es perfectamente encuadrable en su contenido y, por ende, enjuiciable por este Tribunal. Y ello, precisamente, por el encaje de este tipo de violencia en el artículo 3 del CEDH, a cuyo tenor: “Nadie podrá ser sometido a tortura ni a penas o tratos inhumanos o degradantes”. En este sentido se pronuncia la Sentencia Opuz vs. Turquía, de 9 de junio de 2009, que conlleva la condena, por primera vez en la historia del TEDH, de un Estado parte por violencia doméstica y malos tratos. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), as the highest authority for the guarantee of human rights and fundamental freedoms in Europe, has the specific purpose of ensuring compliance with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), signed in Rome on 4 November 1950. Although this text, in itself, does not contain a regulation of specific protection for cases of gender violence and other types of violence against women, the casuistry can be perfectly framed in its content and, therefore, prosecuted by this Court. This is precisely because this type of violence is covered by Article 3 of the ECHR, which states: "No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment". In this sense, the Opuz v. Turkey Judgment of 9 June 2009 is pronounced, which entails the condemnation, for the first time in the history of the ECtHR, of a state party for domestic violence and ill-treatment.

scholarly journals On the rule of law and the quality of the law: reflections of the constitutional-turned-international judge

2019 ◽  
pp. 131
Author(s):  
Egidijus Küris
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Tradition ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Law

Western legal tradition gave the birth to the concept of the rule of law. Legal theory and constitutional justice significantly contributed to the crystallisation of its standards and to moving into the direction of the common concept of the rule of law. The European Court of Human Rights uses this concept as an interpretative tool, the extension of which is the quality of the law doctrine, which encompasses concrete requirements for the law under examination in this Court, such as prospectivity of law, its foreseeability, clarity etc. The author of the article, former judge of the Lithuanian Constitutional Court and currently the judge of the European Court of Human Rights, examines how the latter court has gradually intensified (not always consistently) its reliance on the rule of law as a general principle, inherent in all the Articles of the European Convention on Human Rights, to the extent that in some of its judgments it concentrates not anymore on the factual situation of an individual applicant, but, first and foremost, on the examination of the quality of the law. The trend is that, having found the quality of the applicable law to be insufficient, the Court considers that the mere existence of contested legislation amounts to an unjustifiable interference into a respective right and finds a violation of respective provisions of the Convention. This is an indication of the Court’s progressing self-approximation to constitutional courts, which are called to exercise abstract norm-control.La tradición occidental alumbró la noción del Estado de Derecho. La teoría del Derecho y la Justicia Constitucional han contribuido decisivamente a la cristalización de sus estándares, ayudando a conformar un acervo común en torno al mismo. El Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos emplea la noción de Estado de Derecho como una herramienta interpretativa, fundamentalmente centrada en la doctrina de la calidad de la ley, que implica requisitos concretos que exige el Tribunal tales como la claridad, la previsibilidad, y la certeza en la redacción y aplicación de la norma. El autor, en la actualidad Juez del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos y anterior Magistrado del Tribunal Constitucional de Lituania, examina cómo el primero ha intensificado gradualmente (no siempre de forma igual de consistente) su confianza en el Estado de Derecho como principio general, inherente a todos los preceptos que forman el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos, hasta el punto de que en algunas de sus resoluciones se concentra no tanto en la situación de hecho del demandante individual sino, sobre todo y ante todo, en el examen de esa calidad de la ley. La tendencia del Tribunal es a considerar que, si observa que la ley no goza de calidad suficiente, la mera existencia de la legislación discutida supone una interferencia injustificable dentro del derecho en cuestión y declara la violación del precepto correspondiente del Convenio. Esto implica el acercamiento progresivo del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos a los Tribunales Constitucionales, quienes tienen encargado el control en abstracto de la norma legal.

Protection from poverty in the European Court of Human Rights

2019 ◽  
pp. 335-360
Author(s):  
Elena Pribytkova
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
European Level ◽  
Economic Rights ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Adequate Food ◽  
European Court ◽  
Normative Basis ◽  
Judicial Protection

This paper analyses the practice of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which gives judicial protection to minimum socio-economic guarantees indispensable for freedom from poverty while addressing civil and political rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). I explore the normative basis, scope, strategies, conditions and effectiveness of the ECtHR’s enforcement of basic socio-economic guarantees, such as access to adequate food, water, sanitation, housing, clothing, health, and social security. The paper examines the virtues and shortcomings of the ECtHR’s approach and discusses legal and political measures necessary to improve judicial protection of the poor in Europe. It shows the necessity of the elaboration of a systematic legal conception clarifying the content and scope of socio-economic guarantees of freedom from poverty protected by the ECHR as well as common standards of their judicial enforcement. At the same time, I advocate for the direct judicial protection of socio-economic rights at the European level. An essential political measure in this sense would be the expansion of the Court’s jurisdiction to the rights enshrined in the European Social Charter and the Revised European Social Charter.

Interim Resolution CM/RESDH(2017)429: Execution of the Judgment of the European Court of Human Rights Ilgar Mammadov Against Azerbaijan (Council of Eur. Comm. of Ministers)

2018 ◽  
Vol 57 (2) ◽  
pp. 358-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julie-Enni Zastrow
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Member State ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
First Time

On December 5, 2017, the Council of Europe's Committee of Ministers (Committee) issued an interim resolution concerning the European Court of Human Rights case of Ilgar Mammadov v. Azerbaijan. In this resolution, the Committee, for the first time ever, launched infringement proceedings against a member state of the European Convention of Human Rights (Convention).

scholarly journals Characteristics of an Effective Child Protection System in the European and International Contexts

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mariëlle R. Bruning ◽  
Jaap E. Doek
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Child Protection ◽  
Protection System ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Rights Of The Child ◽  
European Court ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Main Components

AbstractIn the European context, an understanding that States are responsible for an effective child protection system is well established. Further, all 47 members of the CoE have adopted the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and all European countries have ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Thus, States have come to understand their responsibility in terms of the child’s right to protection. The aim of this article is to explicate core elements of an effective child protection system within a child’s rights framework. This aim is accomplished by highlighting and providing analysis of the principles set forth in the CRC and further elaborated in General Comment No. 13 (2011) and by the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the main components of policies and other relevant documents of the European Union (EU) and the Council of Europe (CoE), and caselaw from the European Court of Human Rights (ECrtHR) and then presenting recommendations for an effective State-run child protection system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document