The European and Inter-American human rights courts are increasingly moving beyond their original mandates and making determinations about the design of national courts. They have judicialized new areas of the law, empowered national courts over other branches of government, and encouraged changes in judicial administration. By empowering domestic judiciaries, these regional human rights courts have also (intentionally or not) empowered themselves. ; The European and Inter-American human rights courts are increasingly moving beyond their original mandates and making determinations about the design of national courts. They have judicialized new areas of the law, empowered national courts over other branches of government, and encouraged changes in judicial administration. By empowering domestic judiciaries, these regional human rights courts have also (intentionally or not) empowered themselves.
The article sums up the state of international human rights law as concerns the issue of responsibility for human rights violations allegedly carried out by private persons and entities. It employs four main legal concepts: imputability of private actions to a State, positive obligations of States, duties of private persons and entities, and 'horizontal' effect of human rights. The attempt is made to see how these concepts appear in the case-law of international monitoring bodies and regional courts. The article also attempts to indicate pending questions as concerns the responsibility of private persons and entities for human rights violations and to introduce possible approaches that an international or regional judicial or legislative process could undertake to remedy the gaps, in particular in the narrower context of private military companies. One of the obvious conclusions that emerges from the study is that international actors have preferred the development of the scope of positive obligations that States ought to undertake within various human rights treaties. It is through these obligations that international human rights standards have come to circumscribe private actions. The scope of positive obligations for States typically involve the following measures: adoption of appropriate legislation, provision of judicial remedies and compensation where appropriate. It can be said that the existing legal framework contains most if not all the necessary elements to hold such legal entities as private military or security contractors accountable for human rights violations. The question lies more with the courage to use them to ensure respect for human rights. ; The 'Regulating Privatisation of "War": The Role of the EU in Assuring the Compliance with International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights" (PRIV-WAR) project is funded by the European Community's 7th Framework Programme under grant agreement no. 217405.
Abstract Critics challenge international courts for their interference with domestic democratic processes and alleged violations of rule of law standards: they claim that these guardians of the rule of law are not well guarded themselves. These concerns should not be dismissed too quickly as mere disgruntled venting by populist politicians. This article focuses on regional human rights courts and argues that the same interests and values that justify rule of law standards of impartiality, independence and accountability domestically also justify similar standards for international courts. Focusing on the European Court of Human Rights and its doctrine of the margin of appreciation, the article demonstrates how this doctrine may contribute to fulfilling the rule of law but at the same time may also endanger it. This requires changes to the doctrine to ensure that the core rule of law standards of predictability and protection against arbitrary discretion are respected.
There is empirical evidence that corporations, often in collusion with states, are complicit in, if not instigators of, a variety of human rights violations. Despite this evidence, the international community of states has been unwilling or unable to respond to these violations in any adequate measure. At the same time, the discourse of human rights has become integral to state legitimacy in a post-Cold War society. An analysis of the legal structure of the corporation and its omnipresence in the global political economy raises questions about the overarching framework of an international human rights law that protects corporations in analogous ways to physical persons. The extension of rights to corporations reveals a human rights paradigm that holds private property and capitalist accumulation at the core of its value system. This thesis scrutinises the association between human rights and corporations and raises questions about whether human rights law can be used to challenge corporate power. The thesis is an empirically based inquiry into the perspectives of judges from the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights on the potential for human rights law to respond to corporate harms. The thesis seeks to examine the role that human rights courts play in using existing mechanisms of human rights law in cases involving corporate violations. The data was gathered from a detailed analysis of case law from these regional human rights systems, as well as fifteen interviews with judges from the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights. The analysis reveals that the open-texture of the law and the use of international human rights courts in counter-hegemonic struggles is a strong indication of the possibility for alternative uses of human rights law. These alternative uses of law are illustrative of the potential to challenge the relative impunity afforded to corporations from within the very system that has been developed to protect them.
This article examines treaty interpretation based on consensus, or the idea that legal or political practice that is not directly related to a treaty can be used in interpreting it, or at least in granting more discretion to States Parties. The practice of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, contrasted with the well-settled practice of the European Court of Human Rights, reveals that consensus interpretation plays an important role in entrenching the legitimacy of international human rights courts. The Inter-American Court's practice seems to rely on consensus when it supports a progressive, teleological interpretation of human rights. The article argues that this selective engagement eliminates the legitimacy-building possibilities of the consensus method of interpretation, but that the Inter-American Court, in seeking legitimacy not from States Parties, but other stakeholders, does not seem particularly concerned with legitimacy costs (even if it probably should). ; Not peer reviewed
MKRI is a new governmental body which was established under the Third Amendment of the UUD NRI 1945. This article examines its proper function which underlies its jurisdiction to review the constitutionality of legislation. According to the issue, this article argues that MKRI should be treated as a human rights court whenever it undertakes its jurisdiction to review the constitutionality of legislation. The function of the MKRI as a human rights court justifies its existence and also prescribes principles for its operation. It means that in reviewing the constitutionality of legislation the MKRI should enhance the protection of human rights through its judicial policy and constitutional interpretation.
The idea of the World Court of Human Rights was first envisioned in 1947 along with other institutions designed to create a system capable of the worldwide protection of individual human rights. The focus of the present study is to determine key issues of the prospective establishment of the World Court by an examination of its theoretical position among the United Nations bodies, regional and another inter-governmental human rights organisation. Analysis of the function and mechanisms of the current international human rights protection system would lead to deliberation on the prospective substantial and procedural competences of the World Court, the enforcement mechanism, jurisdiction and related benefits. The objective of the final part is to discuss challenges regarding its political and legal feasibility. Without the visionaries of the past, there would be no substantial system of human rights today. The World Court of Human Rights is a vision for the future.
This paper grapples with Bernard Williams's prima vista enigmatic assertion that '[w]hether it is a matter of good philosophical sense to treat a practice as a violation of human rights, and whether it is politically good sense, cannot ultimately constitute two separate questions'. Though Williams's approach to thinking about human rights has a number of affinities with other 'political' and 'minimalist' understandings, we highlight its distinctive features and argue that it has significant implications for our understanding of human rights along a number of key dimensions. We then proceed to explain how Williams's way of thinking about human rights coheres with certain aspects of the reasoning of one of the most important international human rights courts, to wit, the European Court of Human Rights. This lends further plausibility to the view that a politically realistic understanding of human rights, of the kind urged by Williams, should be taken seriously, since it is a plausible candidate for the explanation of important aspects of human rights practices. We close by examining the suggestion that thinking in these terms is worryingly conservative.
The law on human rights court has brought the new hopes for certain people have suffered because of the human rights violation happened in the past government (before the law enacted in the years of 2000). The demand of justice has been made by victims, the families of victims and other sympathetic parties by bringing those who have violated human rights in the past. The demand for justice does not only focus on human rights violations, which occurred in the past but also similar human rights violations that will occur in the future. The existence of a permanent Human Rights Court seems to imply that human rights will be upheld and protected. The resolution of past human rights violations via a conflict approach is preferable for the national reconciliation. The resolution of past human rights violations through extra-judicial organizations is an advanced step towards resolving the case, whereas a conflict approach can be used to settle the case. The existence of the Human Rights Law provides a new frontier in implementing the principle of restorative justice in the approach of case settlement. It is hoped that such restorative justice can create a political balance between the past and the future.
This article researches the basis of the concept of reproductive rights in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). After a systematic and transversal presentation the ECtHR's jurisprudence on reproductive issues, the article argues that the ECtHR does not capture the specificity of reproductive rights, especially the gender perspective and the importance of reproductive health. Faced with arguments of prioritization of certain rights, the ECtHR repeatedly applies the European Convention on Human Rights to domestic rights as if they were neutral and often avoids addressing claims related to discrimination. Besides, while reproductive health is at the core of reproductive rights, the ECtHR's case law shows self-restraint unless there is a very serious threat on the women's health. This contrasts with international standards on the right to health. Without considering those essentialist and realistic characteristics of reproductive issues, the ECtHR fails to develop a European concept of reproductive rights. The last parts of the article present the political constraints that plague on the ECtHR, which may explain the minimalist jurisprudence in this area. However, those constraints do not justify all the inconsistencies in the ECtHR's use of the European consensus and the margin of appreciation doctrine in the field of reproductive rights.
The subject of the study is the changes taking place in the legislation on property protection in Eastern European states due to the influence of pilot judgments. Special attention is paid to the relevant principles of property rights established by the case-law of the ECtHR
The Internet-related cases coming to the European Court of Human Rights provide a good illustration of the challenges posed to the protection of human rights as based on the European Convention of Human Rights drafted in 1950. Considering that the Convention is a 70-year-old instrument, the Strasbourg Court has to deal with these cases using the body of principles and interpretation methods and techniques that has been developed so far, and in particular the 'living instrument' doctrine. In this study I propose to explore some main threads in the Court's jurisprudence on Internet-related cases, outlining the specific nature of Internet-related cases, discussing the problem of rights connected with the Internet as well as the impact of the Internet on such classical rights as freedom of expression and the right to privacy. I conclude that the Internet-related case law of the Convention is in a process of constant development. The Strasbourg Court has demonstrated that it is capable of dealing with Internet-related cases based on general Convention norms and using its well-developed interpretation techniques. The striking feature of Strasbourg's case law is the ECtHR's recognition of the considerable importance of the Internet as regards the exercise of freedom of expression, and in particular freedom to seek and access information. Although the ECtHR regards the Internet as a communication medium, however, it recognises its specific features which affect the performance of rights protected by the Convention as well as dangers it poses for the protection of human rights under the European Convention of Human Rights. ; University of Gdańsk, Poland ; Adam Wiśniewski is Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Public International Law in the Faculty of Law and Administration, University of Gdańsk, Poland. ; adam.wisniewski@prawo.ug.edu.pl ; 109 ; 133 ; 3 ; Best M.L., Can the Internet Be a Human Right? (in:) S. Hick, E.F. Halpin and E. Hoskins (eds.), Human Rights and the Internet, New York 2000. ; Decision of the ECtHR of 11 March 2014 as to the admissibility of the case of Akdeniz v. Turkey, application no. 20877/10. ; Decision of the ECtHR of 18 October 2005 as to the admissibility of the case of Perrin v. the United Kingdom. ; Directive 2000/31 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market. ; Garlicki L. (ed.), Konwencja o Ochronie Praw Człowieka i Podstawowych Wolności. Tom I, Komentarz do artykułów 1–18, Warsaw 2010. ; Flogartis S., Zwart T., Fraser J., The European Court of Human Rights and its Discontents. Turning Criticism into Strength, Cheltenham/Northampton 2013. ; Gosztonyi G European Court of Human Rights: Internet Access as a Means of Receiving and Imparting Information and Ideas, "International Comparative Jurisprudence" 2020, vol. 6, no. 2, https://ojs.mruni.eu/ojs/international-comparative-jurisprudence/article/view/6292. ; Human Rights Council: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, 16 May 2011, A/HRC/17/27, https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/G12/153/25/PDF/G1215325.pdf?OpenElement. ; Human Rights Council: The promotion, protection and enjoyment of human rights on the Internet, 27 June 2016, https://www.article19.org/data/fi les/Internet_Statement_Adopted.pdf. ; Internet: Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe, 2011, updated June 2015, https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/research_report_internet_eng.pdf. ; Kakavoulis K., The case Google Spain v. AEPD and Mario Costeja Gonzalez of the Court of Justice of the European Union: A Brief Critical Analysis, https://www.homodigitalis.gr/en/posts/2900. ; Mik C., Charakter, struktura i zakres zobowiązań z Europejskiej Konwencji Praw Człowieka, "Państwo i Prawo" 1992, no. 4. ; Murphy T. and O Cuinn G., Works in Progress: New Technologies and the European Court of Human Rights, "Human Rights Law Review" 2010, vol 10, no. 4. ; Karska E. and Karski K., Introduction: Extraterritorial Scope of Human Rights, "International Community Law Review" 2015, vol. 17, no. 4–5. ; Prebensen S.C., The Margin of Appreciation and Articles 9, 10 and 11 of the Convention, "Human Rights Law Journal" 1998, vol. 19, no. 1. ; Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, GE.11–13201, 16 May 2011, https://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/ 17session/A.HRC.17.27_en.pdf. ; Jasmontaite L. and Hert P. de, Access to the Internet in the EU: A Policy Priority, a Fundamental, a Human Right or a Concern for eGovernment? "Brussels Privacy Hub Working Paper" February 2020, vol. 6, no. 19, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339860840_Access_to_the_Internet_in_the_EU_a_policy_priority_a_fundamental_a_human_right_or_a_concern_for_eGovernment. ; Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, 'Freedom of Expression on the Internet: A study of legal provisions and practices related to freedom of expression, the free flow of information and media pluralism on the Internet in OSCE participating States', 15 December 2011, https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/e/f/80723.pdf. ; Rzucidło J., Prawo dostępu do internetu jako podstawowe prawo człowieka: Część I, "Kwartalnik Naukowy Prawo Mediów Elektronicznych" 2010, no. 2. ; Szeghalmi V., Difficulties Regarding the Right to Be Forgotten in the Case Law of the Strasbourg Court, "Athens Journal of Law" 2018, vol. 4, no. 3. ; Wiśniewski A., Koncepcja marginesu oceny w orzecznictwie Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka, Gdańsk 2008. ; Zieliński M., Dostęp do Internetu jako prawo człowieka? W sprawie potrzeby nowej wolności w konstytucji Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej, "Przegląd Sejmowy" 2013, no. 4. ; 26
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or, the Court) is a formidable player in the development of legal approaches to Islam: its jurisdictional remit (covering over 800 million people across 47 countries) is vast; it is a standard setter for human rights protection in general on a global scale; and it has a rapidly growing body of case law relevant to Islam which has influenced states' engagements with Islam within Europe and beyond. Besides the Court's 'direct effects', in terms of impact on relevant legislation, through its decisions to do with Islam, it also has a significant 'indirect', social effect though the messages those decisions communicate about Islam and its place in society. This contribution examines the role of the Court in its direct and indirect effects on Islam, law and Europeanisation.
POVINNÉ OČKOVANIE DETÍ: STANOVISKO EURÓPSKEHO SÚDU PRE ĽUDSKÉ PRÁVA Vaccination of children is of particular importance not only for their parents, but also for Governments in upholding their obligations under international human rights instruments, such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights or the Convention on the Rights of the Child. In the last years, however, the amount of children vaccinated against life-threatening diseases is declining. One of the most frequent arguments against vaccination (especially in case of compulsory vaccination) is the interference with the right to private and family life and the freedom of thought, conscience and religion. The aim of this paper is to analyse the judgement of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Vavřička and Others v. the Czech Republic and to highlight its relevance to Slovakia and international human rights law. URL: http://sic.pravo.upjs.sk/ Očkovanie detí má osobitný význam nielen pre rodičov, ale aj pre vlády štátov pri dodržiavaní ich povinností podľa medzinárodných nástrojov v oblasti ľudských práv, ako je napríklad Medzinárodný pakt o hospodárskych, sociálnych a kultúrnych právach alebo Dohovor o právach dieťaťa. V posledných rokoch však klesá počet očkovaných detí proti život ohrozujúcim chorobám. Jedným z najpoužívanejších argumentov proti očkovaniu (najmä v prípade povinného očkovania) je zásah do práva na súkromný a rodinný život a slobody myslenia, svedomia a náboženského vyznania. Cieľom tohto príspevku je analyzovať rozsudok Európskeho súdu pre ľudské práva v prípade Vavřička a ostatní proti Českej republike a poukázať na jeho význam pre Slovenskú republiku a medzinárodné právo v oblasti ľudských práv.
International law, also known as public international law and law of the nation is the set of rules, norms, and standards generally accepted in relations between nations. The sources of international law include international custom (general state practice accepted as law), treaties, and general principles of lawrecognized by most national legal systems. Human Rights are the basic rights and freedoms to which all human beings are entitled, like civil and politicalrights, the right to life and liberty, freedom of thought and speech/expression, equality before the law, social, cultural and economic rights, the right to food,the right to work, and the right to education. In short, human rights are freedoms established by custom or international agreements that protect the interests of humans and the conduct of governments in every nation. Human rights are distinct from civil liberties, which are freedoms established by the lawof a particular state and applied by that state in its own jurisdiction. Human rights laws have been defined by international conventions, by treaties, and by organizations, particularly the United Nations. These laws prohibit practices such as torture, slavery, summary execution without trial, and arbitrarydetention or exile.
