Suchergebnisse

The role of religious symbols, including wearing religious garments in school and displaying religious symbols in public, has been, and continues to be, a matter of controversy in a number of countries. Students or teachers observing religious dress codes, including Islamic headscarves and Sikh turbans, employees wearing cross and chain around the neck have in some countries been expelled from schools, denied access to higher education, suspended from their jobs or their other rights were restricted. Summarising the above analysed case-law, it could be concluded that European Court of Human Rights (Commission as well) dealt with the diverse forms of religious symbols. The relevance of the issue could be proved by the new applications, which raise new aspects of the display/wearing of religious symbols. ECtHR in its rulings highlighted the State's margin of appreciation and emphasized the importance of the principles of secularisms and equality. Thus, the Court acknowledged the interference with the freedom of religion, it was justified on the grounds laid down in the limitation clause (Article 9(2) of the Convention). In most of the cases the European Court of Human Rights having regard to the Contracting States' margin of appreciation justified the interference as "necessary in democratic society" in pursuance to the legitimate aim of protecting the rights and freedoms of others and of public order. However, the judgment in "Crucifix" case, where the Court did not find that in classrooms hanging crucifix violates freedom of religion, raised the discussion about "double standards" applicable to the different religions. Consequently, the pending cases regarding the ban on the full-face veil in France and the prohibition to wear a cross and chain around the neck at work, could draw a new line in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.

The role of religious symbols, including wearing religious garments in school and displaying religious symbols in public, has been, and continues to be, a matter of controversy in a number of countries. Students or teachers observing religious dress codes, including Islamic headscarves and Sikh turbans, employees wearing cross and chain around the neck have in some countries been expelled from schools, denied access to higher education, suspended from their jobs or their other rights were restricted. Summarising the above analysed case-law, it could be concluded that European Court of Human Rights (Commission as well) dealt with the diverse forms of religious symbols. The relevance of the issue could be proved by the new applications, which raise new aspects of the display/wearing of religious symbols. ECtHR in its rulings highlighted the State's margin of appreciation and emphasized the importance of the principles of secularisms and equality. Thus, the Court acknowledged the interference with the freedom of religion, it was justified on the grounds laid down in the limitation clause (Article 9(2) of the Convention). In most of the cases the European Court of Human Rights having regard to the Contracting States' margin of appreciation justified the interference as "necessary in democratic society" in pursuance to the legitimate aim of protecting the rights and freedoms of others and of public order. However, the judgment in "Crucifix" case, where the Court did not find that in classrooms hanging crucifix violates freedom of religion, raised the discussion about "double standards" applicable to the different religions. Consequently, the pending cases regarding the ban on the full-face veil in France and the prohibition to wear a cross and chain around the neck at work, could draw a new line in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights.

The dissertation explores the principle of proportionality as an instrument deriving from the notion of "democratic society" and applied by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in order to establish whether national institutions succeeded in striking a fair balance between the conflicting Convention rights or between competing individual and public interests. In the first chapter, after presenting the origins of the principle, the development of a three-tiered proportionality test and its dissemination, the main parameters relevant for the analysis of this principle are identified and the main issues of academic discussion concerning the application of proportionality by the ECtHR are revealed. The second chapter explores the evolution of the application of the proportionality principle in the case law of ECtHR and reveals the main features of proportionality test as applied in the early practice of Convention institutions. The third chapter deals with the interaction of the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, in particular examining the impact of margin of appreciation doctrine upon the proportionality assessment conducted by the ECtHR and analysing the contents and interplay of the factors determining the width of the margin of appreciation. The forth chapter explores both commonalities and peculiarities of the application of proportionality principle in the context of different Convention rights and exposes the main criteria relevant to the balancing exercise performed by the Court. The final chapter assesses the balancing-based model of proportionality test as applied by the ECtHR, identifying the most prospective trends of its application.

The dissertation explores the principle of proportionality as an instrument deriving from the notion of "democratic society" and applied by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in order to establish whether national institutions succeeded in striking a fair balance between the conflicting Convention rights or between competing individual and public interests. In the first chapter, after presenting the origins of the principle, the development of a three-tiered proportionality test and its dissemination, the main parameters relevant for the analysis of this principle are identified and the main issues of academic discussion concerning the application of proportionality by the ECtHR are revealed. The second chapter explores the evolution of the application of the proportionality principle in the case law of ECtHR and reveals the main features of proportionality test as applied in the early practice of Convention institutions. The third chapter deals with the interaction of the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, in particular examining the impact of margin of appreciation doctrine upon the proportionality assessment conducted by the ECtHR and analysing the contents and interplay of the factors determining the width of the margin of appreciation. The forth chapter explores both commonalities and peculiarities of the application of proportionality principle in the context of different Convention rights and exposes the main criteria relevant to the balancing exercise performed by the Court. The final chapter assesses the balancing-based model of proportionality test as applied by the ECtHR, identifying the most prospective trends of its application.

The dissertation explores the principle of proportionality as an instrument deriving from the notion of "democratic society" and applied by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in order to establish whether national institutions succeeded in striking a fair balance between the conflicting Convention rights or between competing individual and public interests. In the first chapter, after presenting the origins of the principle, the development of a three-tiered proportionality test and its dissemination, the main parameters relevant for the analysis of this principle are identified and the main issues of academic discussion concerning the application of proportionality by the ECtHR are revealed. The second chapter explores the evolution of the application of the proportionality principle in the case law of ECtHR and reveals the main features of proportionality test as applied in the early practice of Convention institutions. The third chapter deals with the interaction of the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, in particular examining the impact of margin of appreciation doctrine upon the proportionality assessment conducted by the ECtHR and analysing the contents and interplay of the factors determining the width of the margin of appreciation. The forth chapter explores both commonalities and peculiarities of the application of proportionality principle in the context of different Convention rights and exposes the main criteria relevant to the balancing exercise performed by the Court. The final chapter assesses the balancing-based model of proportionality test as applied by the ECtHR, identifying the most prospective trends of its application.

The dissertation explores the principle of proportionality as an instrument deriving from the notion of "democratic society" and applied by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in order to establish whether national institutions succeeded in striking a fair balance between the conflicting Convention rights or between competing individual and public interests. In the first chapter, after presenting the origins of the principle, the development of a three-tiered proportionality test and its dissemination, the main parameters relevant for the analysis of this principle are identified and the main issues of academic discussion concerning the application of proportionality by the ECtHR are revealed. The second chapter explores the evolution of the application of the proportionality principle in the case law of ECtHR and reveals the main features of proportionality test as applied in the early practice of Convention institutions. The third chapter deals with the interaction of the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, in particular examining the impact of margin of appreciation doctrine upon the proportionality assessment conducted by the ECtHR and analysing the contents and interplay of the factors determining the width of the margin of appreciation. The forth chapter explores both commonalities and peculiarities of the application of proportionality principle in the context of different Convention rights and exposes the main criteria relevant to the balancing exercise performed by the Court. The final chapter assesses the balancing-based model of proportionality test as applied by the ECtHR, identifying the most prospective trends of its application.

There is a marked increase in the number of migrants and asylum-seekers in Europe in recent years. Such tendency leads to an increasing number of appeals to international institutions. This becomes a particular challenge for national and international (European) justice, as this may provoke conflicts of law in courts' practice. Originating from two different European legal orders, the European Court of Human Rights together with the Court of Justice of the European Union plays a crucial role in the protection of the fundamental rights of migrants and asylum-seekers. While some of the approaches of these courts may intertwine, others may cause legal gaps or uncertainty. Therefore, it is essential to understand to what extent the level of human rights protection in these two courts coincides. This Master's Thesis is focused on how the two European courts coexist in terms of migration and asylum, what are the trends in the migration-related jurisprudence of these two courts, and what role the courts play in the legal system of Ukraine.

There is a marked increase in the number of migrants and asylum-seekers in Europe in recent years. Such tendency leads to an increasing number of appeals to international institutions. This becomes a particular challenge for national and international (European) justice, as this may provoke conflicts of law in courts' practice. Originating from two different European legal orders, the European Court of Human Rights together with the Court of Justice of the European Union plays a crucial role in the protection of the fundamental rights of migrants and asylum-seekers. While some of the approaches of these courts may intertwine, others may cause legal gaps or uncertainty. Therefore, it is essential to understand to what extent the level of human rights protection in these two courts coincides. This Master's Thesis is focused on how the two European courts coexist in terms of migration and asylum, what are the trends in the migration-related jurisprudence of these two courts, and what role the courts play in the legal system of Ukraine.

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.

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.

The object of this master's thesis is the right to strike at the International Labour Organization, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. The main aim of the work is to identify the main problems associated with the recognition of the right to strike in the International Labour Organization, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. The main objectives of the work: To study the regulation of the right to strike in the International Labour Organization, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Analyze the current problems associated with the recognition of the right to strike in the above-mentioned international organizations. Determine the potential and possible prospects for the development of the right to strike in modern international law. The implementation of the tasks led the author to the conclusion that, despite the wide recognition of the right to strike in the regulating international bodies and national laws of most countries in the world, the right to strike is now in a precarious position when it comes to practice. The stable position of right to strike in ILO standards, which has long allowed regulatory bodies to protect and promote trade union rights, has been replaced by a "controversial consensus" following a conflict between employers and workers at the 2012 International Labour Conference. As will be discussed in this master's thesis, this consensus was reached rather as a quick and temporary solution to the problem, and not as a joint solution to the conflict by the ILC participants. At the same time, the issue of confrontation between the freedom of movement of businesses and collective labor rights, including the right to strike, has not yet been resolved in the international bodies of the European Union. More generally, the confrontation between the economic and social values of the European Union.

The object of this master's thesis is the right to strike at the International Labour Organization, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. The main aim of the work is to identify the main problems associated with the recognition of the right to strike in the International Labour Organization, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. The main objectives of the work: To study the regulation of the right to strike in the International Labour Organization, the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Analyze the current problems associated with the recognition of the right to strike in the above-mentioned international organizations. Determine the potential and possible prospects for the development of the right to strike in modern international law. The implementation of the tasks led the author to the conclusion that, despite the wide recognition of the right to strike in the regulating international bodies and national laws of most countries in the world, the right to strike is now in a precarious position when it comes to practice. The stable position of right to strike in ILO standards, which has long allowed regulatory bodies to protect and promote trade union rights, has been replaced by a "controversial consensus" following a conflict between employers and workers at the 2012 International Labour Conference. As will be discussed in this master's thesis, this consensus was reached rather as a quick and temporary solution to the problem, and not as a joint solution to the conflict by the ILC participants. At the same time, the issue of confrontation between the freedom of movement of businesses and collective labor rights, including the right to strike, has not yet been resolved in the international bodies of the European Union. More generally, the confrontation between the economic and social values of the European Union.

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.

The object of the master's thesis is the international legal standards for hate speech identification. The main purpose of thesis is identification, systematization and analysis of the criteria used by the UN Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights in order to determine the degree of legitimacy of hate speech. The overall objectives of the work are: to characterize the main features of the legal regulation of freedom of expression in the framework of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights; to interpret the concept of "hate speech" within the framework of International Human Rights Law; to discover the specifics of hate speech online identification; to determine the features and patterns of hate speech criteria implementation in the decisions of the UN Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights. Using such methods as legal document analysis, bibliographic and comparative methods, it was considered that determining the degree of legitimacy of statements qualifying as "hostility" is a complex task. The existence of indications regarding the restriction of certain types of statements in international legal documents demonstrates the importance of such restrictions in order to protect the freedom of expression, but at the same time not to protect people who use this right to justify the use of hate speech. The principle challenge in the context of hate speech is the lack of precise criteria to identify the moment when the legitimate hate speech turns illegal. Despite the criteria for hate speech identification used in International Human Rights Law, such criteria are more likely to be subsidiary than mandatory. The human factor in Human Rights Law does not allow to limit the expression of a person's opinion to a constant framework. Judicial bodies create the criteria for identifying illegal hate speech on such factors as the current political situation, religious influence, attitudes towards minorities and public opinion, but at the same time determine the degree of legitimacy of the statement following the standards and recommendations of International Human Rights Law.