Suchergebnisse

Die vorliegende Arbeit analysiert den Umgang mit dem Tatbestand der Holocaust-Leugnung durch die Europäische Union (EU) und den Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (EGMR). Derzeit befinden sich diese in einer heiklen Situation: Sie müssen das Gedenken an ein für die europäische Identität zentrales historisches Ereignis – den Holocaust – pflegen und schützen und zugleich die Achtung der Grundrechte, insbesondere der Meinungsfreiheit, gewährleisten. Diese besondere Situation erfordert eine gründliche Untersuchung des europäischen Umgangs mit dem Tatbestand der Holocaust-Leugnung. Der erste Teil der Dissertation steckt den Anwendungsbereich der europarechtlichen Verpflichtungen zur Kriminalisierung der Holocaust-Leugnung ab. Bewertet wird insbesondere die Bedeutung des Rahmenbeschlusses 2008/913/JHA über Rassismus und Fremdenfeindlichkeit für die EU-Mitgliedstaaten. Dabei werden einige Beispiele der Umsetzung in staatliches Recht dargestellt. Der zweite Teil der Arbeit befasst sich mit der Rechtsprechung des EGMR und untersucht das Verhältnis zwischen dem Tatbestand der Holocaust-Leugnung und der Meinungsfreiheit mit dem Ziel, die Grundsätze, nach denen Staaten verpflichtet sind, entsprechende Äußerungen zu kriminalisieren, herzuleiten. Die übergreifenden Ziele der Untersuchung sind: a) den Charakter des Zusammenspiels zwischen EU und EGMR herauszuarbeiten; b) zu ermitteln, ob die jeweiligen Positionen gegensätzlich oder komplementär sind; c) die Rechtsnatur und den Inhalt der für die Mitgliedstaaten begründeten Verpflichtungen zu bestimmen; d) herauszuarbeiten, ob eine europaweite Kriminalisierung verpflichtend ist oder lediglich gefördert werden soll; und e) ob beziehungsweise unter welchen Bedingungen ein mit Kriminalstrafe sanktioniertes Verbot der Holocaust-Leugnung erstrebenswert wäre. ; The present study aims to analyse the legal treatment of the crime of denialism by the two main actors in European justice, namely, the European Union ('EU') and the European Court of Human Rights ('ECtHR'). Presently, these two systems find themselves in a delicate position: they must cherish and protect the memory of an historical event – the Holocaust – which is central to Europe's own identity, while simultaneously promoting respect for fundamental rights such as the freedom of speech. This unique balance raises a need for a thorough investigation into Europe's approach to the crime of denialism. The dissertation's first section seeks to measure the scope of EU-imposed obligations to make denialism a crime. Notably, the impact on EU Member States of the Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA on racism and xenophobia is assessed, with illustrations of a few archetypal examples of domestic implementing legislation. The second part of the dissertation turns to the jurisprudence of the ECtHR to examine the relationship between Holocaust denial as a crime and the right to freedom of expression, with a view to deducing the principles under which States must comply in the criminalization of this kind of utterance. The work's overall goals are to assess: a) the nature of interactions between the EU and ECtHR; b) whether their positions on denialism are better portrayed in terms of contrast or mutual support; c) the legal nature and content of the obligations originating for the Member States; d) whether a Europe-wide criminal prohibition on denialism is dictated or simply encouraged; and e) whether such a prohibition would be desirable, and if so, under what conditions.

Parution: G. B. Vai et W. Cavazza, e, Four Centuries of the word 'Geology', UlisseAldrovandi 1603 in Bologna, Minerva Edizioni, Bologna, 2003, pp. 255-279 The history of science, and geology in particular, as well as studies on the training of the Italian State, have paid little or almost no attention to the complex events of the Italian Geological Charter. To the extent that there is still great uncertainty about the origins and paternity of the project — to read the 19th century, the only sources. The excellent biography of Quintino Sella (1827-1884), signed by Quazza, is limited to a reference to the involvement of the scientist — who became a leader in politics — in the rapid succession of events which, starting in July 1861, led to the issuing of a Royal Decree on 12 December of the same year, which established the beginning of the country's geological survey (Quazza 1992, p. 356). An eminent geology scholar, David Oldroyd, indicates 1877 as the start of operations, while the Geological Service website prefers 1867 (Oldroyd 1996; Carusone 1996; Topley 1885). As we shall see, these indications are only partially correct. Archival sources that emerged recently from decades of neglect, or which were photocopied in the course of the 1990s at the historical headquarters of the Geological Service, now closed for restoration, and no longer available in early 2000 (perhaps due to the various removals), shed light on the fascinating and sometimes dramatic history of one of the least studied episodes of the relationship between the Italian State and scientific practices, geology in the first place (MAIC 4194; Jacobacci 1973 did not mention the case; Eramo 1996). Still exposed to criticism and budget cuts, chronically lacking in staff, between the end of the 19th century and the early 20th century, the Geological Service managers produced reports of the difficulties they were facing on a daily basis. They felt that there was a need to justify the slow progress in publishing the paper, the poor average quality of the ...