Suchergebnisse

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.

The article presents a brief overview of India-U.S. relations during the period of Narendra Modi's government and Barack Obama's administration. The author analyzes the dynamics of cooperation development after the victory of Bharatiya Janata Party in the 2014 Parliamentary elections in India and studies the key directions of bilateral agenda. The current condition of India-U.S. strategic dialogue and the influence of human rights issues on the countries' cooperation are characterized.

Since 2014 the states' cooperation has been growing rapidly. The bilateral investment, trade and economic interdependence have significantly increased. Some experts and mass media note that Barack Obama and Narendra Modi are having friendly relations. From a different angle, a number of agreements between countries still remain unaccomplished. For instance, the U.S. support for India's permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council, its accession to APEC and the implementation of nuclear deal have yet to be turned into achievement.

Together with strengthening the bilateral strategic dialogue, the U.S. has intensified the criticism of India's human rights record. The main part of it includes the cases of religious intolerance, which are observed in the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom reports and the remarks given by U.S. lawmakers and official representatives, including the Ambassador to India. Washington's careful attention to the human rights issues and religious violence in particular is one of the major irritants in the U.S.-India relations.

The engagement of Indian Americans in the local U.S. politics and their lobbying efforts in the context of U.S.-India relations are revealed. The author outlines the near-terms perspectives of bilateral cooperation.

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.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Art. 5, Universal Declaration of Human Rights). According to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, torture means: . any act by which a person is intentionally subjected to severe physical or mental pain or suffering, in particular in order to obtain from this person or from a third party information or confession, to punish him for an act which he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, to intimidate or pressure him or her to intimidate or to put pressure on a third party, or for any other reason based on any form of discrimination, when such pain or suffering is applied by a public official or any other person acting officially or at the instigation or with the express or tacit consent of such persons. No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms). This article was prepared by the Institute for Democracy (Moldova) and is funded by the European Union under the EIDHR (European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights). The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Union.

The article is dedicated to the analysis of influence of the human rights issue on the development of German-Chinese political relations at the present stage. The author analyses main issues of the Germany- China human rights dialogue, its legal basis, the positions and arguments of the sides. In the author's opinion, one of the main obstacles to the development of cooperation between Germany and China in this area is a different perception of the nature of human rights. The author concludes that both Germany and China in effect are willing to put aside the issue of "human rights violations" and criticism of non-compliance with fundamental civil and political rights of Chinese citizens for the sake of economic and trade cooperation between the two countries.