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 paper explores the execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Having carried out a brief historical analyses and reviewed the normative legal acts governing the execution of decisions of the above-mentioned courts, the authors argue that through the monitoring mechanism of the execution of the courts' decisions is very different, both regional judicial institutions have problems related to the execution of their decisions. The purpose of the study is to determine the problems of non-enforcement of decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and to find ways to resolve them. The methodological basis of this study was the provisions of a general scientific dialectical method and a logical method aimed at presenting the material of the article, formulating recommendations and proposals. The method of comparative analysis was also widely used, which makes it possible to identify the general and the difference of both judicial institutions with respect to the monitoring the execution of judgments, and the method of system analysis by which the normative legal acts and the courts' decisions were examined. The European Court of Human Rights, which often applies the method of financial compensation, showed a high level of execution of judgments in contrast to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which requires states not only to compensate for money, but to make legislative changes, to bring perpetrators to justice, etc. The authors conclude that only dialogue between courts and states and the use of various conciliation mechanisms could positively influence the effectiveness of the execution of judgments. A dialogue should consist in the correct interpretation by courts of the provisions of international human rights treaties and an accessible explanation for states of the content of court decisions. ; Рассматриваются вопросы исполнения решений Европейского суда по правам человека (ЕСПЧ) и Межамериканского суда по правам человека (МСПЧ). Проведя краткий исторический обзор и рассмотрев нормативные правовые акты, регулирующие вопросы исполнения решений вышеназванных судов, авторы определяют, что механизмы контроля за исполнением государствами решений судов сильно различаются. Однако оба региональных судебных учреждения имеют проблемы, связанные с исполнением их решений. Цель исследования - определить причины неисполнения актов ЕСПЧ и МСПЧ и найти пути их решения. Методологическую основу исследования составили положения общенаучного диалектического и логического методов, направленные на изложение материала статьи, формулирование рекомендаций и предложений. Также использовались метод сравнительного анализа, позволяющий выявить общее и различное названных судебных учреждений по вопросу контроля за исполнением государствами их решений, и метод системного анализа, с помощью которого проводилось изучение нормативных правовых актов и решений рассматриваемых судов. Европейский суд по правам человека, нередко применяющий метод денежной компенсации, показал высокий уровень исполнения решений в отличие от Межамериканского суда по правам человека, требующего от государств не только денежной компенсации, но и внесения изменений в законодательство, привлечения виновных к ответственности и т. д. Авторы пришли к выводу, что только диалог между судами и государствами и применение различных согласительных механизмов могут положительно повлиять на эффективность исполнения решений. Диалог должен заключаться в правильном толковании судами положений международных договоров по правам человека и доступном разъяснении для государств содержания постановлений судов.

УДК 347.9The purpose of the article – a critical analysis of the position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the justification, through the analysis of the ECtHR practice and scientific work on execution of the ECtHR judgments, about the coordination of positions of national courts and the supranational body.The methodological basis for the study: general scientific methods (analysis, synthesis, comparison); private and academic (interpretation, comparative legal, formal-legal).Problems and basic scientific results:The issue of implementation of the Human Rights Court decisions at the national level oc-curs when the compensation is not enough to eliminate the revealed violations. Russian legislator opted for the situation of Human Rights by the European Court finding a violation of the provisions of the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the consideration by the court of a particular case, in connection with the decision by which the applicant applied to the ECtHR mechanism for review of the decision on the new circumstances. Supreme Court puts forward three conditions for the implementation of the revi-sion of the judicial act on a national level, which should be available at the same time: 1) the continuous nature of the adverse effects; 2) the existence of violations of the Convention or gross procedural violations; 3) a causal link between the breach and the consequences.The author point out that the regulation of possible conflicts between the Convention and national legislation is based on cooperation (not confrontation) States and the European Court of Human Rights. Such practice of cooperation based on the principles of subsidiarity (addition to national rights protection system); evolutionary interpretation of the Convention (which implies flexibility, and accounting for changes in public relations); Judges dialogue and to develop advisory opinions. Consequently, the task of the Constitutional Court can not be default search options, on the contrary, its task – to determine exactly how, taking into account the differences in the legislation, the decision will be enforced. Failure, as well as the improper execution of judgments of the ECtHR may involve the establishment of a new violation of the provisions of the Convention and sanctions against violators. ; УДК 347.9Автор рассматривает порядок реализации постановлений Европейского Суда по правам человека через возможность пересмотра решения российского суда по новым обстоятельствам. В качестве нового обстоятельства рассматривается признание Европейским Судом по правам человека нарушения положений Конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод при рассмотрении судом конкретного дела, в связи с принятием решения по которому заявитель обращался в ЕСПЧ. Конституционный Суд РФ полагает, что суды Российской Федерации обязаны обращаться в КС всякий раз, когда при пересмотре дела по новым обстоятельствам приходят к выводу, что вопрос о возможности применения соответствующего закона может быть решен только после подтверждения его соответствия Конституции РФ.

Ключевые слова: Европейская конвенция по правам человека, Европейский суд по правам человека, свобода выражения мнения, свобода творчества. = Keywords: artistic freedom, European Convention on Human Rights, European Court of Human Rights, freedom of expression. Раздел "Международное право". ; В статье рассматривается практика Европейского суда по правам человека в отношении свободы творчества. Несмотря на то, что Европейская конвенция по правам человека 1950 г. напрямую не предусматривает охрану художественных выражений, Европейский суд по правам человека признал, что свобода творчества также пользуется конвенционной защитой. При этом свобода творчества как одна из форм свободы выражения мнения обладает существенными гарантиями от необоснованного посягательства со стороны государства. = The article examines the case law of the European Court of Human Rights with regard to artistic freedom. Notwithstanding that the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights does not directly provide for protection of artistic expressions, the European Court of Human Rights acknowledged that artistic freedom also enjoys conventional protection. Artistic freedom, as one of the form of freedom of expression, has significant guarantees against unwarranted encroachments from government.

International integration today includes not only a political but also a legal aspect. With the help of various supranational tools, such as international commercial arbitration, international treaties and agreements, various organizations, including those formed on the basis of such agreements, global trends of law are formed. The convergence of legal systems is the key to the harmonious development of civil (private) relations. Defamation law is no exception. In order to better protect private life and freedom of speech, it is necessary to study carefully both the law prevailing in certain foreign countries and the practice of supranational structures. The European Court of Human Rights holds a special place among such structures. In its decisions, it introduced the most advanced legal constructions of protection against defamation, which are seen in American and German law. These structures are referred to as standards or principles of law enforcement developed by the European Court of Human Rights. The standards of the European Court of Human Rights are applied in all countries that are parties to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms dated 04.11.1950. To fully protect the rights of its citizens the Russian Federation should also not stand aside from the European Court of Human Rights positions. ; Международная интеграция включает в себя сегодня не только политический, но и правовой аспект. С помощью различных наднациональных инструментов, таких как международные коммерческие арбитражи, международные договоры и соглашения, различного рода организации, в том числе образованные на основании таких договоров, формируются мировые тенденции права. Сближение правовых систем является ключом к гармоничному развитию гражданских (частных) отношений. Диффамационное право не исключение. Для более эффективной защиты частной жизни и свободы слова необходимо тщательное изучение как права, сложившегося в отдельных зарубежных странах, так и практики наднациональных структур. Особое место среди таких структур занимает Европейский суд по правам человека. В свои решениях он внедрил самые современные юридические конструкции защиты от диффамации, которые сформировались в американском и немецком праве. Указанные конструкции именуются стандартами, или принципами правоприменения, разработанными Европейским судом по правам человека. Стандарты Европейского суда по правам человека применяются во всех странах, являющихся участниками Конвенция о защите прав человека и основных свобод от 04 ноября 1950 г. Российская Федерация для полноценной защиты прав своих граждан также не должна оставаться в стороне от сформированных Европейским судом по правам человека позиций.

Раздел "Международное право" - рубрика "Права человека" ; Статья посвящена рассмотрению белорусского и европейского законодательства, международных договоров в сфере регламентации начала правовой охраны человеческой жизни с учетом произошедших в последнее время изменений законодательства рассматриваемых государств. В статье представлен краткий обзор теоретических обоснований возможных этапов возникновения права на жизнь, характеристика нормативного закрепления этого права в международном праве, законодательстве Республики Беларусь и некоторых европейских государств; проведен анализ практики европейских государств в указанной сфере и национального законодательства Республики Беларусь; выработаны некоторые рекомендации в целях совершенствования правовой основы реализации права на жизнь в нашей республике. В процессе работы по выявлению и обобщению литературного и нормативного материала внимание было сосредоточено на изучении не только правовых источников, но и вспомогательных средств, используемых при их толковании, — решений и консультативных заключений специализированных международных судов, в первую очередь, Европейского суда по правам человека. Некоторые из рассмотренных в статье вопросов освещаются впервые. = The present article is devoted to the analysis of the Belarusian as well as European law in the sphere of international treaty regulation of the right to life. The article takes into account the recent legal developments in the said sphere. The article comprises a brief overview of a right to life, its legal regulation in international law, Belarusian law and the law of certain EU states. The present study also analyses the implementation of the legal norms on the right to life by the EU states and Belarus and proposes certain recommendations to enhance the legal regulation of the right to life in Belarus. The present work is based not only on normative and doctrinal sources but also on a vast amount of judicial practice — judgments and advisory opinions of regional judicial bodies, inter alia, of the European Court of Human Rights. Some of the issues raised in the article are not covered in doctrine and are introduced here for the first time by the author.