Suchergebnisse

The advancement of new technologies is radically changing the world. Nowadays society is a transparent society. In recent years, the use of video surveillance cameras (also called Closed Circuit Television, or CCTV) throughout the world has grown to unprecedented levels. And there we find out many problems, concerning protection of an individuals private life. The work discusses the issue of right to private life protection in a context of video surveillance. The right to private life is quite young in world's legitimate system and especially in Lithuanian law system. Personal data protection as a part of privacy right is an aspect of human rights. This proposition is universally accepted. As long ago as 1948, privacy was given recognition in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In 1950, privacy was implemented in European Convention of Human Rights. This work is divided into three parts. One of them is talking about a conception of a privacy, separates data protection conception from right to private law, the second one is talking about video surveillance systems in general, their technical capacity, the last one is talking about European Convention of Human Rights and its article 8 as the main principle which is a sound base for European Union and Lithuanian regulation of video surveillance, analysis Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Directive 95/46/EC of the European Union, Constitution of Lithuania, Lithuanian Data Protection Law in the context of video surveillance. As the studies of right to privacy (and personal data as a part of it) protection in the context of video surveillance are only making their first steps in Lithuania, these thesis was aiming to explore and define the right to privacy (personal data protection problem) in oder to give firm grounds for the scientific investigations of this field in the future.

The advancement of new technologies is radically changing the world. Nowadays society is a transparent society. In recent years, the use of video surveillance cameras (also called Closed Circuit Television, or CCTV) throughout the world has grown to unprecedented levels. And there we find out many problems, concerning protection of an individuals private life. The work discusses the issue of right to private life protection in a context of video surveillance. The right to private life is quite young in world's legitimate system and especially in Lithuanian law system. Personal data protection as a part of privacy right is an aspect of human rights. This proposition is universally accepted. As long ago as 1948, privacy was given recognition in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In 1950, privacy was implemented in European Convention of Human Rights. This work is divided into three parts. One of them is talking about a conception of a privacy, separates data protection conception from right to private law, the second one is talking about video surveillance systems in general, their technical capacity, the last one is talking about European Convention of Human Rights and its article 8 as the main principle which is a sound base for European Union and Lithuanian regulation of video surveillance, analysis Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Directive 95/46/EC of the European Union, Constitution of Lithuania, Lithuanian Data Protection Law in the context of video surveillance. As the studies of right to privacy (and personal data as a part of it) protection in the context of video surveillance are only making their first steps in Lithuania, these thesis was aiming to explore and define the right to privacy (personal data protection problem) in oder to give firm grounds for the scientific investigations of this field in the future.

The advancement of new technologies is radically changing the world. Nowadays society is a transparent society. In recent years, the use of video surveillance cameras (also called Closed Circuit Television, or CCTV) throughout the world has grown to unprecedented levels. And there we find out many problems, concerning protection of an individuals private life. The work discusses the issue of right to private life protection in a context of video surveillance. The right to private life is quite young in world's legitimate system and especially in Lithuanian law system. Personal data protection as a part of privacy right is an aspect of human rights. This proposition is universally accepted. As long ago as 1948, privacy was given recognition in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In 1950, privacy was implemented in European Convention of Human Rights. This work is divided into three parts. One of them is talking about a conception of a privacy, separates data protection conception from right to private law, the second one is talking about video surveillance systems in general, their technical capacity, the last one is talking about European Convention of Human Rights and its article 8 as the main principle which is a sound base for European Union and Lithuanian regulation of video surveillance, analysis Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Directive 95/46/EC of the European Union, Constitution of Lithuania, Lithuanian Data Protection Law in the context of video surveillance. As the studies of right to privacy (and personal data as a part of it) protection in the context of video surveillance are only making their first steps in Lithuania, these thesis was aiming to explore and define the right to privacy (personal data protection problem) in oder to give firm grounds for the scientific investigations of this field in the future.

The advancement of new technologies is radically changing the world. Nowadays society is a transparent society. In recent years, the use of video surveillance cameras (also called Closed Circuit Television, or CCTV) throughout the world has grown to unprecedented levels. And there we find out many problems, concerning protection of an individuals private life. The work discusses the issue of right to private life protection in a context of video surveillance. The right to private life is quite young in world's legitimate system and especially in Lithuanian law system. Personal data protection as a part of privacy right is an aspect of human rights. This proposition is universally accepted. As long ago as 1948, privacy was given recognition in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In 1950, privacy was implemented in European Convention of Human Rights. This work is divided into three parts. One of them is talking about a conception of a privacy, separates data protection conception from right to private law, the second one is talking about video surveillance systems in general, their technical capacity, the last one is talking about European Convention of Human Rights and its article 8 as the main principle which is a sound base for European Union and Lithuanian regulation of video surveillance, analysis Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, Directive 95/46/EC of the European Union, Constitution of Lithuania, Lithuanian Data Protection Law in the context of video surveillance. As the studies of right to privacy (and personal data as a part of it) protection in the context of video surveillance are only making their first steps in Lithuania, these thesis was aiming to explore and define the right to privacy (personal data protection problem) in oder to give firm grounds for the scientific investigations of this field in the future.

Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights is devoted for the protection and respect of family and private life. Talking about family life, it is important to say that the definition of it have evolved for years creating more and more legal issues. The Court has considered the family to include husband and wife and children who are dependent on them, including illegitimate and adopted children. It seems that de facto family ties can arise where parties are living together outside marriage and children born out of such relationships form part of the family unit from the moment of birth and by the very fact of it. The family ties exist even where the parents are not living together at the time of the child's birth. In some circumstances, relations with grandparents may be protected under Article 8. More remote relationships are generally not close enough to consti¬tute family relationships protected by Article 8. There is, however, some slender evidence to suggest that a broader view is being taken of what constitutes the family. Engagement does not in itself constitute family life, but the relationship between a prisoner and his fiancee falls within private life. The same is true of transsexuals couples. Implementing one of those rights, arise a violation of other rights, embodied in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. The conflict usually is between articles 8 and 10. The freedom of expression is called as the essential foundations of democratic society. The media has a "public watch dog" function, as it mentioned in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Media has a task to import not only information which is favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also offend, chocked or disturbed information. Society has a right to obtain information about political matters or about matters of public interest. This freedom includes two components: freedom to receive information and freedom to impart them. These rights must be used in a such way that they do not constitute the violation of private life. Under the Convention, right to respect family or private life embodied in the article 8 and freedom of expression embodied in the Article 10 are not absolute. They state some restrictions and limitations. The interference is legitimate when it is necessary in a democratic society, interest of national security, prevention or disorder of crime and other. This is so called negative obligations. The problems of the protection of human rights can arise when the state fails to take such the obligations, for instance to enact some particular law – so called positive obligations. Thus it could the violation not only when the state fails to take positive obligations, but also when such the law trespasses the limit of the proportionality taking negative obligations. The problems about private life are coming out of its changing concept in XXI century. New technologies have vested the society with new instruments and made individuals' lives more convenient. Evolution of technologies and social life enhanced individuals to access to information and knowledge; thus it inevitably may lead to a situation when members of society recognize the right to know, right to communicate, right to express views and contribute to the society as a more vital and valuable than traditional and straightforward "right to be left alone". Legally speaking, of all the European human rights in the international catalogue, privacy is perhaps the most difficult to define and circumscribe. Nowadays, a person has less control on his personal information, because private life and privacy has become less important as to receive information and freedom to impart it. What's why Europe and all the world confronts with big problems of violation of human rights in context of the protection of personal data The solution of these problems could be self regulation and legislation of various legal acts.

Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights is devoted for the protection and respect of family and private life. Talking about family life, it is important to say that the definition of it have evolved for years creating more and more legal issues. The Court has considered the family to include husband and wife and children who are dependent on them, including illegitimate and adopted children. It seems that de facto family ties can arise where parties are living together outside marriage and children born out of such relationships form part of the family unit from the moment of birth and by the very fact of it. The family ties exist even where the parents are not living together at the time of the child's birth. In some circumstances, relations with grandparents may be protected under Article 8. More remote relationships are generally not close enough to consti¬tute family relationships protected by Article 8. There is, however, some slender evidence to suggest that a broader view is being taken of what constitutes the family. Engagement does not in itself constitute family life, but the relationship between a prisoner and his fiancee falls within private life. The same is true of transsexuals couples. Implementing one of those rights, arise a violation of other rights, embodied in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. The conflict usually is between articles 8 and 10. The freedom of expression is called as the essential foundations of democratic society. The media has a "public watch dog" function, as it mentioned in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Media has a task to import not only information which is favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also offend, chocked or disturbed information. Society has a right to obtain information about political matters or about matters of public interest. This freedom includes two components: freedom to receive information and freedom to impart them. These rights must be used in a such way that they do not constitute the violation of private life. Under the Convention, right to respect family or private life embodied in the article 8 and freedom of expression embodied in the Article 10 are not absolute. They state some restrictions and limitations. The interference is legitimate when it is necessary in a democratic society, interest of national security, prevention or disorder of crime and other. This is so called negative obligations. The problems of the protection of human rights can arise when the state fails to take such the obligations, for instance to enact some particular law – so called positive obligations. Thus it could the violation not only when the state fails to take positive obligations, but also when such the law trespasses the limit of the proportionality taking negative obligations. The problems about private life are coming out of its changing concept in XXI century. New technologies have vested the society with new instruments and made individuals' lives more convenient. Evolution of technologies and social life enhanced individuals to access to information and knowledge; thus it inevitably may lead to a situation when members of society recognize the right to know, right to communicate, right to express views and contribute to the society as a more vital and valuable than traditional and straightforward "right to be left alone". Legally speaking, of all the European human rights in the international catalogue, privacy is perhaps the most difficult to define and circumscribe. Nowadays, a person has less control on his personal information, because private life and privacy has become less important as to receive information and freedom to impart it. What's why Europe and all the world confronts with big problems of violation of human rights in context of the protection of personal data The solution of these problems could be self regulation and legislation of various legal acts.

This article is devoted to investigation of problems of implementation of article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. On the basis of the social research carried out by the author a presumption has been made that the legislative endows certain social privileges, marks officers of statutory institutions out of other social groups, however, does not give enough attention as to their human and civil rights. The article comprehensively analyses officers' right to defence, moral support during disciplinary proceedings, in when imposing of statutory reprimands (sanctions). A distinguishing feature of the 21st century is united and democratic Europe where fundamental democratic values, supremacy of law and human rights, are respected. Due to peculiarities of institution activities officers inevitably encounter restrictions of their civil rights, although provisions of the Convention are supposed to be fully applied towards them and problems of their implementation are to be solved on the basis of legal acts and recommendations of the community law. Thus, when implementing human rights in internal administration of statutory institutions, it is needed to solve controversial questions where unified powers of scientists and experts of public administration are necessary.

This article is devoted to investigation of problems of implementation of article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. On the basis of the social research carried out by the author a presumption has been made that the legislative endows certain social privileges, marks officers of statutory institutions out of other social groups, however, does not give enough attention as to their human and civil rights. The article comprehensively analyses officers' right to defence, moral support during disciplinary proceedings, in when imposing of statutory reprimands (sanctions). A distinguishing feature of the 21st century is united and democratic Europe where fundamental democratic values, supremacy of law and human rights, are respected. Due to peculiarities of institution activities officers inevitably encounter restrictions of their civil rights, although provisions of the Convention are supposed to be fully applied towards them and problems of their implementation are to be solved on the basis of legal acts and recommendations of the community law. Thus, when implementing human rights in internal administration of statutory institutions, it is needed to solve controversial questions where unified powers of scientists and experts of public administration are necessary.

The object of the master's work is public relations that arise in connection with the use of artificial intelligence and possible violations of human rights in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights. The purpose of the work is to study possible violations of human rights in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights in connection with the use of artificial intelligence. The tasks of the master's work: to determine the concept of artificial intelligence and to identify the challenges that makes the application of artificial intelligence; to consider the European Convention on Human Rights as the main instrument for protecting the right to privacy; on the basis of judicial practice to analyse the problem of privacy of personal life, guaranteed by Article 8 of the ECHR, in connection with the use of artificial intelligence. There were used the dialectical method, the methods of formal logic, the comparative legal method, the system method and other methods of cognition. The European Convention on Human Rights establishes human rights and freedoms, obliging each member country that has ratified this agreement to guarantee them. Many governments and regions recognize the fundamental nature of the rights protected by Article 8 of the ECHR. The use of artificial intelligence is fraught with a number of dangers and legal problems. It leads to a narrowing of the sphere of privacy and there's the need to establish at the legislative level the conditions for the limits of its application. The closer AI programs get to human skills – thinking and creativity, the more damage will be done to human rights protected by Art. 8 ECHR. It is necessary to find the right balance between technical development and the protection of human rights.

The object of the master's work is public relations that arise in connection with the use of artificial intelligence and possible violations of human rights in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights. The purpose of the work is to study possible violations of human rights in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights in connection with the use of artificial intelligence. The tasks of the master's work: to determine the concept of artificial intelligence and to identify the challenges that makes the application of artificial intelligence; to consider the European Convention on Human Rights as the main instrument for protecting the right to privacy; on the basis of judicial practice to analyse the problem of privacy of personal life, guaranteed by Article 8 of the ECHR, in connection with the use of artificial intelligence. There were used the dialectical method, the methods of formal logic, the comparative legal method, the system method and other methods of cognition. The European Convention on Human Rights establishes human rights and freedoms, obliging each member country that has ratified this agreement to guarantee them. Many governments and regions recognize the fundamental nature of the rights protected by Article 8 of the ECHR. The use of artificial intelligence is fraught with a number of dangers and legal problems. It leads to a narrowing of the sphere of privacy and there's the need to establish at the legislative level the conditions for the limits of its application. The closer AI programs get to human skills – thinking and creativity, the more damage will be done to human rights protected by Art. 8 ECHR. It is necessary to find the right balance between technical development and the protection of human rights.

In the light of the forthcoming accession of the European Union (EU) to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), the article examines the human rights protection in Europe and presents situations, which demonstrate the lack of coherence and efficiency in the current system of protection. The article discusses how the EU accession to the ECHR will affect to the human rights protection in Europe. The article also analyses mechanisms and procedures proposed in the Draft Accession Agreement, including rules on the attribution of conduct, creation of the co-respondent mechanism and prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the procedure before the European Court of Human Rights. The proposed new system clarifies the complex issue of the responsibility of the EU and its Member States therefore ensuring legal certainty for individual applicants. Further, the accession should ensure better interaction between the co-existing human rights protection systems in Europe. However, the proposed co-respondent mechanism raises doubts due to its complexity; moreover, the prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights might have a negative impact on the access to justice under the ECHR. The article also raises the question on the future application of the presumption of equivalent protection. Finally, it is summed up that the conclusion that the EU accession to the ECHR will certainly enhance the coherence and efficiency of human rights protection in Europe is premature.

In the light of the forthcoming accession of the European Union (EU) to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), the article examines the human rights protection in Europe and presents situations, which demonstrate the lack of coherence and efficiency in the current system of protection. The article discusses how the EU accession to the ECHR will affect to the human rights protection in Europe. The article also analyses mechanisms and procedures proposed in the Draft Accession Agreement, including rules on the attribution of conduct, creation of the co-respondent mechanism and prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the procedure before the European Court of Human Rights. The proposed new system clarifies the complex issue of the responsibility of the EU and its Member States therefore ensuring legal certainty for individual applicants. Further, the accession should ensure better interaction between the co-existing human rights protection systems in Europe. However, the proposed co-respondent mechanism raises doubts due to its complexity; moreover, the prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights might have a negative impact on the access to justice under the ECHR. The article also raises the question on the future application of the presumption of equivalent protection. Finally, it is summed up that the conclusion that the EU accession to the ECHR will certainly enhance the coherence and efficiency of human rights protection in Europe is premature.

In the light of the forthcoming accession of the European Union (EU) to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), the article examines the human rights protection in Europe and presents situations, which demonstrate the lack of coherence and efficiency in the current system of protection. The article discusses how the EU accession to the ECHR will affect to the human rights protection in Europe. The article also analyses mechanisms and procedures proposed in the Draft Accession Agreement, including rules on the attribution of conduct, creation of the co-respondent mechanism and prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the procedure before the European Court of Human Rights. The proposed new system clarifies the complex issue of the responsibility of the EU and its Member States therefore ensuring legal certainty for individual applicants. Further, the accession should ensure better interaction between the co-existing human rights protection systems in Europe. However, the proposed co-respondent mechanism raises doubts due to its complexity; moreover, the prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights might have a negative impact on the access to justice under the ECHR. The article also raises the question on the future application of the presumption of equivalent protection. Finally, it is summed up that the conclusion that the EU accession to the ECHR will certainly enhance the coherence and efficiency of human rights protection in Europe is premature.

In the light of the forthcoming accession of the European Union (EU) to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), the article examines the human rights protection in Europe and presents situations, which demonstrate the lack of coherence and efficiency in the current system of protection. The article discusses how the EU accession to the ECHR will affect to the human rights protection in Europe. The article also analyses mechanisms and procedures proposed in the Draft Accession Agreement, including rules on the attribution of conduct, creation of the co-respondent mechanism and prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the procedure before the European Court of Human Rights. The proposed new system clarifies the complex issue of the responsibility of the EU and its Member States therefore ensuring legal certainty for individual applicants. Further, the accession should ensure better interaction between the co-existing human rights protection systems in Europe. However, the proposed co-respondent mechanism raises doubts due to its complexity; moreover, the prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights might have a negative impact on the access to justice under the ECHR. The article also raises the question on the future application of the presumption of equivalent protection. Finally, it is summed up that the conclusion that the EU accession to the ECHR will certainly enhance the coherence and efficiency of human rights protection in Europe is premature.

Master Thesis is devoted to the study of the advisory opinion procedure prescribed by the Protocol No. 16 to the European Convention on Human Rights or, to be more precise, to the study of the value of this procedure for the protection of human rights in the European Union. The Master Thesis is aimed on establishing whether the advisory opinion procedure could become an effective tool for improving the human rights protection in the Union. The main objectives of the Thesis were to analyse the provisions of the Protocol No. 16 and to find out whether the aims of the Protocol could be achieved and what will be the obstacles, if any, for doing this; and to establish how the advisory opinion procedure will influence the national courts and EU law. The research has shown that the advisory opinion procedure will enhance the judicial dialogue between the Court and the national courts and will ensure establishing higher human rights protection standards. However, there are still some doubts that the procedure will decrease the Court's workload due to the length of the procedure, the additional burden that will be put on the Grand Chamber, etc. Moreover, the Protocol may prevent the Constitutional Courts from effective realization of the function of constitutional control and can interfere into the relationship between the Constitutional Courts and the Highest Ordinary Courts. The main concern about the non-binding nature of the advisory opinions was, however, refuted. Besides, the research has shown that the Court of Justice of the European Union in Opinion 2/13 reasonably stated that the advisory opinion procedure could undermine the autonomy of EU law that neither can be put higher than the protection of human rights, nor being neglected.