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.

The Impact of the Pan-European General Principles of Good Administration on Swiss Law

2020 ◽  
pp. 353-374
Author(s):  
Nadja Braun Binder ◽  
Ardita Driza Maurer
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Swiss Law ◽  
Written Law ◽  
The Impact

This chapter is dedicated to exploring the impact on Swiss administrative law of the pan-European general principles of good administration developed within the framework of the Council of Europe (CoE). The chapter claims that the standards stemming from the European Convention on Human Rights and the case law of the European Court of Human Rights have been adopted in an exemplary way by Swiss authorities. The influence was especially strong in the 1980s and 1990s. The same cannot be said regarding other documents of the CoE, whose impact remains disparate because many aspects of the pan-European general principles of good administration were already part of the national written law. The chapter concludes that despite the exemplary integration of CoE instruments heated debates on the content of these instruments are not excluded from Switzerland.

Domestic Investigation and Prosecution of Atrocities Committed during Military Operations: The Impact of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights

2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 369-404
Author(s):  
Silvia Borelli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Full Potential ◽  
Remedial Measures ◽  
Legal Systems ◽  
Military Operations ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Proactive Approach ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Impact

The undeniable impact of the European Convention on Human Rights on the legal systems – and the wider society – of Member States of the Council of Europe would not have been possible without its unique monitoring system, centred around the European Court of Human Rights and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe. The present article assesses the extent to which the European Court's judgments that have found violations of the procedural obligations under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention to investigate unlawful killings, disappearances, acts of torture or other ill-treatment have, in fact, led to an improvement in the capability of the domestic legal systems of states parties to ensure accountability for such abuses. On the basis of four case studies, it is concluded that the European Court's judgments, coupled with the supervisory powers of the Committee of Ministers, have the potential to make a very great impact on the capability of domestic legal systems to deal with gross violations of fundamental human rights, and have led to clear and positive changes within the domestic legal systems of respondent states. Nevertheless, this is by no means always the case, and it is suggested that, in order for the Convention system to achieve its full potential in the most politically charged cases, the European Court should adopt a more proactive approach to its remedial powers by ordering specific remedial measures, to include in particular the opening or reopening of investigations.

scholarly journals Protection of Whistleblowers by the European Union, the Council of Europe, and the European Court of Human Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 25-36
Author(s):  
Sára Kiššová
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Financial Interests ◽  
Internal Sources ◽  
Illegal Activities

Whistleblower protection in the European Union is undergoing significant developments. The new Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2019 on the protection of persons reporting breaches of Union law sets a minimum standard for the protection of whistleblowers. It is awaiting implementation in Member States' national law by December 2021. However, a certain level of protection is also guaranteed by the European Court of Human Rights case law principles. Reports of illegal activities provided from close internal sources can strengthen the protection of the EU's financial interests. Adequate protection is needed to prevent retaliation against whistleblowers. As the deadline for transposing this directive approaches, the article aims to analyse the Directive 2019/1973 and compare it with the protection guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

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».

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.

Allowing the Right Margin: The European Court of Human Rights and The National Margin of Appreciation Doctrine: Waiver or Subsidiarity of European Review?

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 381-418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dean Spielmann
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Margin Of Appreciation ◽  
Essential Question ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Right ◽  
Domestic Law

AbstractThe doctrine of the national margin of appreciation is well established in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. In applying this essentially judge-made doctrine, the Court imposes self-restraint on its power of review, accepting that domestic authorities are best placed to settle a dispute. The areas in which the doctrine has most often been applied will be presented here, looking at various examples from case law. After a brief overview of the doctrine’s origin, the analysis will focus on the situations in which the margin has been allowed or denied. Does it relate merely to factual and domestic-law aspects of a case? What is the scope of the margin of appreciation when it comes to interpreting provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights? What impact does an interference (whether disproportionate or not) with a guaranteed right have on the margin allowed? Is there a second-degree or ‘reverse’ margin of appreciation, whereby discretionary powers can be distributed between executive and judicial authorities at domestic level? Lastly it is noteworthy that Protocol No 14, now ratified by all Council of Europe Member States, enshrines in Article 12—at least to some extent—an obligation to apply a margin of appreciation. One essential question remains: by allowing any margin of a certain width, is the European Court simply waiving its power of review or is it attributing responsibility to the domestic courts in the interest of a healthy subsidiarity?

scholarly journals Enforcing the Judgments of the ECtHR in Russia in Light of the Amendments to the Law on the Constitutional Court

2016 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kerttu Mäger
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Russian Constitution ◽  
Cherry Picking ◽  
The Law

The paper was written to analyse the enforceability of the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights in Russia, particularly in light of recent amendments to the Law on the Constitutional Court and relevant case law of the Constitutional Court of Russia. Article 46 of the European Convention on Human Rights, obliging member states to execute the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights, does not leave room for ‘cherry-picking’ in enforcing the judgements. However, the Constitutional Court has suggested that Russian authorities should indeed engage in cherry-picking and may refuse to enforce judgements that are not in accordance with the Russian Constitution as interpreted by the Constitutional Court. In December 2015, the Russian parliament amended the Law on the Constitutional Court so as to empower said court to declare judgements of the European Court of Human Rights unenforceable when implementation would be in conflict with the Constitution of Russia. The paper discusses the background of these developments and alternatives for overcoming the conflict between domestic legislation and the instruments of the Council of Europe.

scholarly journals Últimas tendencias de un modelo de protección antidiscriminatoria en constante evolución

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Hernández Llinás
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Controversial Issue ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Derechos Humanos ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights

El objeto central del presente trabajo es el comentario de un caso recientemente resuelto por el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos, el asunto J.D. y A. contra Reino Unido. Las particularidades de este caso nos permiten comprobar algunas debilidades y fortalezas de la doctrina del Tribunal de Estrasburgo en materia de igualdad y no discriminación, un ámbito de incuestionable valor en el espacio europeo de derechos, así como destacar la emergencia de nuevos planteamientos tuitivos en relación con la siempre controvertida figura de la discriminación por indiferenciación. The main purpose of this essay is to analyse the judgement recently delivered by the European Court of Human Rights in J.D. and A. versus United Kingdom case. This case enables us to highlight some strengths and weaknesses of the Court’s non-discrimination case-law, as well as to draw attention to a new protective approach that the Court takes when it comes to remedy the effects of discrimination by undifferentiation, an always controversial issue. Given the arrival of an increasing number of cases related to article 14 CEDH and the Court’s broader interpretation of such article within the last decade, taking a closer look to its case-law on the matter seems to be of interest to study the development of common standards on the protection of human rights within the Council of Europe.

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 DOES ARTICLE 2 OF THE EUROPEAN CONVENTION ON HUMAN RIGHTS PRESCRIBE AN ABSOLUTE PROHIBITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY? THE IMPACT OF RECENT PRACTICE OF EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

TEME ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 607
Author(s):  
Ivan B Ilić ◽  
Saša Sava Knežević
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
European Convention ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
European Court ◽  
Critical Interpretation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Almost All ◽  
The Impact

In paragraph 1 of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the imposition of the death penalty is permitted, as a departure from the right to life. In the last decades there has been a tendency for the absolute abolition of the death penalty, in times of war and peace. As a result of this effort, almost all European countries abolished the death penalty. In addition, the Council of Europe adopted Protocol 6 and Protocol 13, which completely abolished the death penalty. The European Court also, in its practice, using the principle of "convention as a living instrument", has changed its approach to the scope of the ban on the application of the death penalty. The authors deal with a critical interpretation of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, trying to answer the question, of whether there has been an abrogation of the provision of paragraph 1 of Article 2, so that according to that provision, there is an absolute ban on the application of the death penalty in the Council of Europe member states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document