Search results

Honour-related violence is increasingly recognised as a human rights problem in a number of countries. However, the scope of State obligations to prevent such acts remains largely unexplored, with the exception of so-called honour killings. This article analyses other forms of honour-related violence from the perspective of the right to private life. It argues that a positive obligation to prevent honour-related violence arises under this right. The extent of the obligation is exemplified by demonstrating to which honour-related acts the right to private life is applicable and which measures authorities can be expected to take in order to prevent these acts.

The article outlines the problems, for the solution of which, from the point of view of the author, it is necessary to search for the optimal balance of personal and public interests in the field of protecting the teacher's right to privacy.
The negative side of posting profiles of university professors and their evaluation by students and other persons on review sites on the Internet is shown. It is proved that a comprehensive solution to this problem and the protection of the right to privacy of teachers could be the deanonymization of users on the Internet, which allows, at the request of the competent authorities, to identify the user who committed illegal actions on the site.
Particular attention is paid to the problem of finding a balance and universality of requirements for such an element of the teacher's individual image as his clothes. The need to study the issue of disseminating the requirements of the Federal Law "On the protection of children from information harmful to their health and development" in relation to the general appearance of teachers in the field of preschool, primary, basic, secondary general education was noted.

The question raised in this master thesis was: "Whether the legislation of the compulsory children's vaccination does not infringe the right to private life?". After the Minister of Health of the Republic of Lithuania initiated a new regulation which states that children who are not vaccinated against polio, measles and rubella will not be able to attend the pre-school or other primary education institutions. This master thesis conducts a study whether the new legal regulation will not infringe a person's right to private life.

The question raised in this master thesis was: "Whether the legislation of the compulsory children's vaccination does not infringe the right to private life?". After the Minister of Health of the Republic of Lithuania initiated a new regulation which states that children who are not vaccinated against polio, measles and rubella will not be able to attend the pre-school or other primary education institutions. This master thesis conducts a study whether the new legal regulation will not infringe a person's right to private life.

The question raised in this master thesis was: "Whether the legislation of the compulsory children's vaccination does not infringe the right to private life?". After the Minister of Health of the Republic of Lithuania initiated a new regulation which states that children who are not vaccinated against polio, measles and rubella will not be able to attend the pre-school or other primary education institutions. This master thesis conducts a study whether the new legal regulation will not infringe a person's right to private life.

Fight against terrorism is an important public interest. Data on natural persons that belongs to the area of their private life could help the state in the aforementioned fight. Therefore, the state may be interested in collecting the data on all the natural persons within its jurisdiction in order to prevent terrorist attacks. This raises the question if the state could collect that information without any legal restrictions. In this work, the relevant provisions of universal international law, the law of the Council of Europe, the European Union and Lithuania will be examined and the answer to the question will be provided. In the universal international law, 17 "sectorial" treaties describe certain types of behaviour that can be called terrorism. Therefore, the present concept of terrorism is very fragmented, i. e. different treaties directly or indirectly provide the definition of terrorism applied just for that certain treaty. It is important to mention that the inclusion of certain features in the concept of terrorism endangers the human rights protected by the international law and may unreasonably restrict the possibilities of freedom fighters to defend themselves from illegal foreign occupation or to seek to realise the right to self-determination. For example, the inclusion of substantial harm to the environment in the definition of terrorism as an alternative feature of this crime may unreasonably restrict the possibilities of freedom fighters, as they may have no viable alternatives to resist illegal violence used against them. The serious harm to property, as an alternative feature of terrorism, may lead to the infringement of the rights of legal protesters. It is also important to mention that some features of the crime of terrorism are not comprehensively defined concepts, e. g. serious harm to property, serious injury or substantial harm to the environment. Therefore, there is the risk that even not considerably dangerous behaviour may be mistakenly called terrorism. As a result, various human rights may be infringed. On the other hand, many of these problems could be avoided by the appropriate interpretation of the provisions of the treaties, as all of them directly or indirectly emphasize the necessity to respect human rights, provides for the possibility to reject a request for extradition if it is reasonably believed that the person will be prosecuted for his nationality, ethnic origin, race, religion or political opinion and as states have other international obligations. The Council of Europe defines the concept of terrorism by making references to universal "sectorial" treaties, but it also define some aspects of the crime of terrorism directly. The European Union has chosen a different way, as it provides the general definition of the crime of terrorism. It is important to mention that both the law of the Council of Europe and the law of the European Union recognize the need to respect human rights during the fight against terrorism. Concerning the definition of terrorism, Lithuania has obliged itself by some universal international treaties and certain treaties of the Council of Europe. Moreover, Lithuania is a member of the European Union therefore the law of the latter is also applied in this country. Thus the provisions of the aforementioned types of law have affected the national criminal law of Lithuania. The criminal code of Lithuania defines two groups of crimes related to terrorism, i. e. the crimes of terrorism and the crimes related to terrorist activities. It is important to mention that the two groups of crimes are not necessarily especially dangerous. All the aforementioned levels of law emphasize the necessity to respect human rights in the fight against terrorism. And the right to private life is one of them. According to the universal international law, the law of the Council of Europe, the European Union and Lithuania, the private life of an individual is a concept that cannot be defined comprehensively. This concept is a very broad one and the essence of it is explained by giving examples of different aspects of the private life of natural persons. All the aforementioned levels of law recognise that the right to private life can be limited. However, this may be done only if certain legal requirements, including the principles of necessity and proportionality, are met. It must be noted that the sensitive areas of the private life of individuals have greater protection, therefore it is harder to justify the interference into them. Automatic measures may also cause problems as, in certain cases, they may be inconsistent with the obligation of the state to take into account the circumstances of the situation and to follow the principles of necessity and proportionality (Lithuanian law does not allow such measures, as, according to the Constitution, the information about the private life of an individual can be collected only if a court has authorized it by a reasoned decision). According to the universal international law, the law of the Council of Europe and Lithuanian law, it may be derogated from the right to private life in an extraordinary situation, but certain legal requirements, including the principles of necessity and proportionality, must also be fulfilled. In conclusion, the state may limit the right to private life of individuals during the fight against terrorism. However, there are legal restrictions for such interference.

This work discusses the main problems related to the guarantee of the employee right to private life. The objective of this work is to determine in what circumstances the employer can lawfully observe or control the employees, and when this becomes the violation of personal rights. It is aimed to determine the limit between the employer and the employee's interests, to find the solution which would not violate the interests of both parties. The work analyses all legal acts which regulate the right to private life, also, it analyses the court practice on this topic. The work begins with the description of the concept of the right to private life in the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and other legal acts of the Republic of Lithuania and international legal acts. The possibility to identify the violations of privacy emerges only when we perceive well what the right to private life is. Almost the greatest part of the work is comprised of the peculiarities of legal regulation of the right to private life in the workplace. The legislation of the state are not clearly regulated when the problems arise related with privacy violations in the workplace, also, the court practice is not very numerous and different. Article 27 of the Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania which was formed not long time ago indicates the limit between the interests of the employer and the employee in a quite abstract manner. This part analyses various legal acts of the Republic of Lithuania and international legal acts which help determining the protection of the interests of both parties. Employers violate the right to private life of their employees in various ways: observing them with the video cameras, following their computers, installing the observation equipment in official vehicles, etc. When analysing the legal acts, literature and court practice on this topic, it is important to ascertain the actions which are mandatory to the heads on purpose of protecting the rights of the employees. The last part discusses the protection of the violated rights, mentions the institutions which accept the claims in the pre-trial order regarding the violation of the right to private life in the workplace. It also summarises the judicial ways of protection as well as the compensation of material and moral damage.

This work discusses the main problems related to the guarantee of the employee right to private life. The objective of this work is to determine in what circumstances the employer can lawfully observe or control the employees, and when this becomes the violation of personal rights. It is aimed to determine the limit between the employer and the employee's interests, to find the solution which would not violate the interests of both parties. The work analyses all legal acts which regulate the right to private life, also, it analyses the court practice on this topic. The work begins with the description of the concept of the right to private life in the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and other legal acts of the Republic of Lithuania and international legal acts. The possibility to identify the violations of privacy emerges only when we perceive well what the right to private life is. Almost the greatest part of the work is comprised of the peculiarities of legal regulation of the right to private life in the workplace. The legislation of the state are not clearly regulated when the problems arise related with privacy violations in the workplace, also, the court practice is not very numerous and different. Article 27 of the Labour Code of the Republic of Lithuania which was formed not long time ago indicates the limit between the interests of the employer and the employee in a quite abstract manner. This part analyses various legal acts of the Republic of Lithuania and international legal acts which help determining the protection of the interests of both parties. Employers violate the right to private life of their employees in various ways: observing them with the video cameras, following their computers, installing the observation equipment in official vehicles, etc. When analysing the legal acts, literature and court practice on this topic, it is important to ascertain the actions which are mandatory to the heads on purpose of protecting the rights of the employees. The last part discusses the protection of the violated rights, mentions the institutions which accept the claims in the pre-trial order regarding the violation of the right to private life in the workplace. It also summarises the judicial ways of protection as well as the compensation of material and moral damage.

This paper covers the problems and dynamics that LGBTQI (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Queer and Intersex) asylum seekers face when they leave their country of origin and enter countries within the European Union. Only a small percentage of people that claim asylum on the basis of reasonable fear of persecution because of sexual orientation are granted asylum within these EU Member States, or some other form of international protection. The paper scans the relevant legislation that is supposed to protect asylum seekers in general and covers the three most important cases of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on the treatment and assessment of asylum applications on the basis of fear of persecution because of sexual orientation. The case at hand needs to be seen within this general framework as we know it so far. F v Hungary concerns the case of a Nigerian national claiming asylum on the basis of fear of persecution in his country of origin because of his homosexuality. To determine his general credibility, the Hungarian determining authorities subjected F to three different psychological tests. However, the psychological experts could not confirm or deny F's sexual orientation based on these tests. Consequently, the determining authorities decided that his general credibility could not be established and his claim for asylum was denied. The Hungarian Appeal Court requested a preliminary ruling before the CJEU. The Court ruled that in these cases it is not always necessary to determine the sexual orientation of an applicant. The CJEU stressed that, when assessing an asylum application, it does not matter whether or not an applicant actually identifies with the particular social group that attracts persecution. Scientific reports from medical, psychological or social experts can certainly be of value throughout the asylum application assessment, but determining authorities cannot be bound by such expert reports. Every case should undergo an in concreto assessment, taking into account the individual circumstances and with respect for human dignity, the right to respect for private and family life, and the right to an effective remedy as guaranteed by Articles 1, 7 and 47 of the EU Charter. Every interference with these rights should be in line with the proportionality principle. Finally, some suggestions are made to shape a future strategy and the development of asylum application assessment.

In the context of constant development of the digital environment, the conflict between the right to privacy and freedom of speech becomes more and more obvious. This confrontation challenges the lawyer in terms of determining the more significant right on case by case basis and gives rise to many ambiguities in law-making and law enforcement practice. The problem raised in the article is the lack of clear legal regulation in the sphere of categorization of personal data subjects and in the voluntary assumed vulnerability of public figures. Within the article, the author points out the importance of the phenomenon of "group privacy" and the lack of elaboration of approaches in regulating the protection of personal data of groups of persons whose private life has become the most vulnerable due to societal, objective facts. Such groups include, among other things, a group of public figures. In order to clarify the scope of the processing of personal data of such subjects, the author proposes to introduce the category "agroup of personal subjects subject to special protection" into the legislation on the protection of personal data. This group shall include public figures, as well as the disabled, elderly pensioners. The author sets the aims 1)to investigate the phenomenon of "group privacy", 2)to define the category of "public figures", 3)to make an attempt to reconcile the right to protection of personal data and freedom of speech. Methods used by the author include formal legal method, comparative legal method and philosophical approach. The result of the article is the author's proposal to oblige operators to develop and publish special policies for the processing of personal data of groups of personal subjects subject to special protection. The author concludes that this approach will contribute to greater transparency in the processing of personal data, to the increase of greater awareness of personal data operators about the difficulties associated with the processing of data of such groups of subjects and the risks of working with them, and also, to the increase of general public awareness of the importance of protecting privacy. ; Вэпоху развития цифровой среды конфликт между правом на частную жизнь исвободой слова становится более ярким. Данное противостояние бросает вызов юристу вчасти определения более значимого вкаждом кейсе права ипорождает немало неясностей в законотворческой деятельности иправоприменительной практике. Проблема, освещаемая встатье, заключается вотсутствии четкого правового регулирования всфере выделения категорий субъектов персональных данных ивдобровольно принятой на себя уязвимости публичных фигур. Автор указывает на значимость явления «групповая приватность» и на непроработанность подходов врегулировании защиты персональных данных групп лиц, чья частная жизнь стала наиболее уязвимой в силу социетальных, объективных фактов. Ктаким группам в том числе относится группа публичных фигур. Чтобы внести ясность всферу обработки персональных данных таких субъектов, автор предлагает ввести взаконодательство озащите персональных данных категорию «группа субъектов персональных данных, подлежащих особой защите». Вэту группу предлагается включить публичные фигуры, атакже инвалидов, пенсионеров— лиц преклонного возраста. Автор ставит следующие задачи: 1)исследовать явление «групповой приватности», 2)определить категорию «публичные фигуры», 3)предпринять попытку примирить право на защиту персональных данных исвободу слова. Автор использует формально-юридический метод, сравнительно-правовой метод ифилософский подход. Автор предлагает обязать операторов разрабатывать ипубликовать особые политики обработки персональных данных групп субъектов, подлежащих особой защите. Такой подход будет способствовать большей прозрачности обработки персональных данных, осведомленности операторов персональных данных о сложностях, связанных собработкой данных таких групп субъектов, ирисках работы с ними, атакже повышению осведомленности общества означимости защиты частной жизни.