Suchergebnisse

The Bosphorus presumption was formed and explicitly applied for the first time in 2005 by the European Court of Human Rights in order to evaluate whether a Member State of the European Union (the EU), by adopting an act which implements EU law, acts in compliance with the Convention. Such issue arose due to a very specific relation between the EU, which is not a party to the Convention, the Member States, each a party to the Convention, and the Convention system. According to the Bosphorus presumption, when a state implements its obligations arising from the membership in the international organization, the State is presumed acting in compliance with the Convention, provided that protection of human rights in that international organization is equivalent to that provided by the Convention. In 2013, the draft agreement on the EU accession to the Convention was negotiated. And although the EU Court of Justice by its Opinion 2/13 postponed the process of the EU accession to the Convention for an indefinite period, the EU primary law still obliges the EU to accede to the Convention. Thus, the question remains whether the EU accession to the Convention is to change the position of the Strasbourg Court on the level of protection of fundamental rights in the EU and further application of the Bosphorus presumption. The objective of this thesis is to examine this presumption and assess the possible effect of the EU accession to the Convention on the existence and application of the Bosphorus presumption. This dissertation analyses application of such presumption as well as arguments supporting or disproving the need for application of the presumption after the EU accession to the Convention and provides probable scenarios of the Bosphorus presumption.

The Bosphorus presumption was formed and explicitly applied for the first time in 2005 by the European Court of Human Rights in order to evaluate whether a Member State of the European Union (the EU), by adopting an act which implements EU law, acts in compliance with the Convention. Such issue arose due to a very specific relation between the EU, which is not a party to the Convention, the Member States, each a party to the Convention, and the Convention system. According to the Bosphorus presumption, when a state implements its obligations arising from the membership in the international organization, the State is presumed acting in compliance with the Convention, provided that protection of human rights in that international organization is equivalent to that provided by the Convention. In 2013, the draft agreement on the EU accession to the Convention was negotiated. And although the EU Court of Justice by its Opinion 2/13 postponed the process of the EU accession to the Convention for an indefinite period, the EU primary law still obliges the EU to accede to the Convention. Thus, the question remains whether the EU accession to the Convention is to change the position of the Strasbourg Court on the level of protection of fundamental rights in the EU and further application of the Bosphorus presumption. The objective of this thesis is to examine this presumption and assess the possible effect of the EU accession to the Convention on the existence and application of the Bosphorus presumption. This dissertation analyses application of such presumption as well as arguments supporting or disproving the need for application of the presumption after the EU accession to the Convention and provides probable scenarios of the Bosphorus presumption.

The Bosphorus presumption was formed and explicitly applied for the first time in 2005 by the European Court of Human Rights in order to evaluate whether a Member State of the European Union (the EU), by adopting an act which implements EU law, acts in compliance with the Convention. Such issue arose due to a very specific relation between the EU, which is not a party to the Convention, the Member States, each a party to the Convention, and the Convention system. According to the Bosphorus presumption, when a state implements its obligations arising from the membership in the international organization, the State is presumed acting in compliance with the Convention, provided that protection of human rights in that international organization is equivalent to that provided by the Convention. In 2013, the draft agreement on the EU accession to the Convention was negotiated. And although the EU Court of Justice by its Opinion 2/13 postponed the process of the EU accession to the Convention for an indefinite period, the EU primary law still obliges the EU to accede to the Convention. Thus, the question remains whether the EU accession to the Convention is to change the position of the Strasbourg Court on the level of protection of fundamental rights in the EU and further application of the Bosphorus presumption. The objective of this thesis is to examine this presumption and assess the possible effect of the EU accession to the Convention on the existence and application of the Bosphorus presumption. This dissertation analyses application of such presumption as well as arguments supporting or disproving the need for application of the presumption after the EU accession to the Convention and provides probable scenarios of the Bosphorus presumption.

The Bosphorus presumption was formed and explicitly applied for the first time in 2005 by the European Court of Human Rights in order to evaluate whether a Member State of the European Union (the EU), by adopting an act which implements EU law, acts in compliance with the Convention. Such issue arose due to a very specific relation between the EU, which is not a party to the Convention, the Member States, each a party to the Convention, and the Convention system. According to the Bosphorus presumption, when a state implements its obligations arising from the membership in the international organization, the State is presumed acting in compliance with the Convention, provided that protection of human rights in that international organization is equivalent to that provided by the Convention. In 2013, the draft agreement on the EU accession to the Convention was negotiated. And although the EU Court of Justice by its Opinion 2/13 postponed the process of the EU accession to the Convention for an indefinite period, the EU primary law still obliges the EU to accede to the Convention. Thus, the question remains whether the EU accession to the Convention is to change the position of the Strasbourg Court on the level of protection of fundamental rights in the EU and further application of the Bosphorus presumption. The objective of this thesis is to examine this presumption and assess the possible effect of the EU accession to the Convention on the existence and application of the Bosphorus presumption. This dissertation analyses application of such presumption as well as arguments supporting or disproving the need for application of the presumption after the EU accession to the Convention and provides probable scenarios of the Bosphorus presumption.

The Bosphorus presumption was formed and explicitly applied for the first time in 2005 by the European Court of Human Rights in order to evaluate whether a Member State of the European Union (the EU), by adopting an act which implements EU law, acts in compliance with the Convention. Such issue arose due to a very specific relation between the EU, which is not a party to the Convention, the Member States, each a party to the Convention, and the Convention system. According to the Bosphorus presumption, when a state implements its obligations arising from the membership in the international organization, the State is presumed acting in compliance with the Convention, provided that protection of human rights in that international organization is equivalent to that provided by the Convention. In 2013, the draft agreement on the EU accession to the Convention was negotiated. And although the EU Court of Justice by its Opinion 2/13 postponed the process of the EU accession to the Convention for an indefinite period, the EU primary law still obliges the EU to accede to the Convention. Thus, the question remains whether the EU accession to the Convention is to change the position of the Strasbourg Court on the level of protection of fundamental rights in the EU and further application of the Bosphorus presumption. The objective of this thesis is to examine this presumption and assess the possible effect of the EU accession to the Convention on the existence and application of the Bosphorus presumption. This dissertation analyses application of such presumption as well as arguments supporting or disproving the need for application of the presumption after the EU accession to the Convention and provides probable scenarios of the Bosphorus presumption.

The Bosphorus presumption was formed and explicitly applied for the first time in 2005 by the European Court of Human Rights in order to evaluate whether a Member State of the European Union (the EU), by adopting an act which implements EU law, acts in compliance with the Convention. Such issue arose due to a very specific relation between the EU, which is not a party to the Convention, the Member States, each a party to the Convention, and the Convention system. According to the Bosphorus presumption, when a state implements its obligations arising from the membership in the international organization, the State is presumed acting in compliance with the Convention, provided that protection of human rights in that international organization is equivalent to that provided by the Convention. In 2013, the draft agreement on the EU accession to the Convention was negotiated. And although the EU Court of Justice by its Opinion 2/13 postponed the process of the EU accession to the Convention for an indefinite period, the EU primary law still obliges the EU to accede to the Convention. Thus, the question remains whether the EU accession to the Convention is to change the position of the Strasbourg Court on the level of protection of fundamental rights in the EU and further application of the Bosphorus presumption. The objective of this thesis is to examine this presumption and assess the possible effect of the EU accession to the Convention on the existence and application of the Bosphorus presumption. This dissertation analyses application of such presumption as well as arguments supporting or disproving the need for application of the presumption after the EU accession to the Convention and provides probable scenarios of the Bosphorus presumption.

The Bosphorus presumption was formed and explicitly applied for the first time in 2005 by the European Court of Human Rights in order to evaluate whether a Member State of the European Union (the EU), by adopting an act which implements EU law, acts in compliance with the Convention. Such issue arose due to a very specific relation between the EU, which is not a party to the Convention, the Member States, each a party to the Convention, and the Convention system. According to the Bosphorus presumption, when a state implements its obligations arising from the membership in the international organization, the State is presumed acting in compliance with the Convention, provided that protection of human rights in that international organization is equivalent to that provided by the Convention. In 2013, the draft agreement on the EU accession to the Convention was negotiated. And although the EU Court of Justice by its Opinion 2/13 postponed the process of the EU accession to the Convention for an indefinite period, the EU primary law still obliges the EU to accede to the Convention. Thus, the question remains whether the EU accession to the Convention is to change the position of the Strasbourg Court on the level of protection of fundamental rights in the EU and further application of the Bosphorus presumption. The objective of this thesis is to examine this presumption and assess the possible effect of the EU accession to the Convention on the existence and application of the Bosphorus presumption. This dissertation analyses application of such presumption as well as arguments supporting or disproving the need for application of the presumption after the EU accession to the Convention and provides probable scenarios of the Bosphorus presumption.

The Bosphorus presumption was formed and explicitly applied for the first time in 2005 by the European Court of Human Rights in order to evaluate whether a Member State of the European Union (the EU), by adopting an act which implements EU law, acts in compliance with the Convention. Such issue arose due to a very specific relation between the EU, which is not a party to the Convention, the Member States, each a party to the Convention, and the Convention system. According to the Bosphorus presumption, when a state implements its obligations arising from the membership in the international organization, the State is presumed acting in compliance with the Convention, provided that protection of human rights in that international organization is equivalent to that provided by the Convention. In 2013, the draft agreement on the EU accession to the Convention was negotiated. And although the EU Court of Justice by its Opinion 2/13 postponed the process of the EU accession to the Convention for an indefinite period, the EU primary law still obliges the EU to accede to the Convention. Thus, the question remains whether the EU accession to the Convention is to change the position of the Strasbourg Court on the level of protection of fundamental rights in the EU and further application of the Bosphorus presumption. The objective of this thesis is to examine this presumption and assess the possible effect of the EU accession to the Convention on the existence and application of the Bosphorus presumption. This dissertation analyses application of such presumption as well as arguments supporting or disproving the need for application of the presumption after the EU accession to the Convention and provides probable scenarios of the Bosphorus presumption.

Straipsnyje analizuojama žmogaus teisių apsauga Europoje, garantuojama pagal Europos Sąjungos ir Europos Tarybos (konkrečiai – Žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių apsaugos konvencijos) teisines sistemas. Nagrinėjama dviejų regioninių teismo institucijų (Europos Žmogaus Teisių Teismo ir Europos Sąjungos Teisingumo Teismo) praktika ir kai kurios žmogaus teisių apsaugos užtikrinimo Europoje problemos. Straipsnyje vertinamas galimas Europos Sąjungos prisijungimo prie Žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių apsaugos konvencijos poveikis žmogaus teisių apsaugai Europoje. Analizuojamos Prisijungimo sutarties projekte siūlomos procesinės taisyklės ir galimi jų trūkumai. Galiausiai pateikiamos įžvalgos dėl šiuo metu esamo žmogaus teisių apsaugos lygio Europoje pakankamumo, kurios iš dalies galėtų būti pagrindas vertinti Europos Sąjungos prisijungimo prie Žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių apsaugos konvencijos poreikį. The article analyses human rights protection in Europe guaranteed in the legal systems of the European Union and the Council of Europe (i.e. the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms). It examines case law of two regional judicial institutions (European Court of Human Rights and Court of Justice of the European Union) and certain problems of human rights protection in Europe. The article also assesses what impact the European Union accession to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms could have on the human rights protection in Europe; and analyses rules and procedures proposed in the draft Accession agreement, and their possible flaws. Finally, views on the current state of human rights protection in Europe are presented, which in a way gives a basis to question the need for the European Union to accede to the Convention.

In the light of the forthcoming accession of the European Union (EU) to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), the article examines the human rights protection in Europe and presents situations, which demonstrate the lack of coherence and efficiency in the current system of protection. The article discusses how the EU accession to the ECHR will affect to the human rights protection in Europe. The article also analyses mechanisms and procedures proposed in the Draft Accession Agreement, including rules on the attribution of conduct, creation of the co-respondent mechanism and prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the procedure before the European Court of Human Rights. The proposed new system clarifies the complex issue of the responsibility of the EU and its Member States therefore ensuring legal certainty for individual applicants. Further, the accession should ensure better interaction between the co-existing human rights protection systems in Europe. However, the proposed co-respondent mechanism raises doubts due to its complexity; moreover, the prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights might have a negative impact on the access to justice under the ECHR. The article also raises the question on the future application of the presumption of equivalent protection. Finally, it is summed up that the conclusion that the EU accession to the ECHR will certainly enhance the coherence and efficiency of human rights protection in Europe is premature.

In the light of the forthcoming accession of the European Union (EU) to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), the article examines the human rights protection in Europe and presents situations, which demonstrate the lack of coherence and efficiency in the current system of protection. The article discusses how the EU accession to the ECHR will affect to the human rights protection in Europe. The article also analyses mechanisms and procedures proposed in the Draft Accession Agreement, including rules on the attribution of conduct, creation of the co-respondent mechanism and prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the procedure before the European Court of Human Rights. The proposed new system clarifies the complex issue of the responsibility of the EU and its Member States therefore ensuring legal certainty for individual applicants. Further, the accession should ensure better interaction between the co-existing human rights protection systems in Europe. However, the proposed co-respondent mechanism raises doubts due to its complexity; moreover, the prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights might have a negative impact on the access to justice under the ECHR. The article also raises the question on the future application of the presumption of equivalent protection. Finally, it is summed up that the conclusion that the EU accession to the ECHR will certainly enhance the coherence and efficiency of human rights protection in Europe is premature.

In the light of the forthcoming accession of the European Union (EU) to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), the article examines the human rights protection in Europe and presents situations, which demonstrate the lack of coherence and efficiency in the current system of protection. The article discusses how the EU accession to the ECHR will affect to the human rights protection in Europe. The article also analyses mechanisms and procedures proposed in the Draft Accession Agreement, including rules on the attribution of conduct, creation of the co-respondent mechanism and prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the procedure before the European Court of Human Rights. The proposed new system clarifies the complex issue of the responsibility of the EU and its Member States therefore ensuring legal certainty for individual applicants. Further, the accession should ensure better interaction between the co-existing human rights protection systems in Europe. However, the proposed co-respondent mechanism raises doubts due to its complexity; moreover, the prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights might have a negative impact on the access to justice under the ECHR. The article also raises the question on the future application of the presumption of equivalent protection. Finally, it is summed up that the conclusion that the EU accession to the ECHR will certainly enhance the coherence and efficiency of human rights protection in Europe is premature.

In the light of the forthcoming accession of the European Union (EU) to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR), the article examines the human rights protection in Europe and presents situations, which demonstrate the lack of coherence and efficiency in the current system of protection. The article discusses how the EU accession to the ECHR will affect to the human rights protection in Europe. The article also analyses mechanisms and procedures proposed in the Draft Accession Agreement, including rules on the attribution of conduct, creation of the co-respondent mechanism and prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the procedure before the European Court of Human Rights. The proposed new system clarifies the complex issue of the responsibility of the EU and its Member States therefore ensuring legal certainty for individual applicants. Further, the accession should ensure better interaction between the co-existing human rights protection systems in Europe. However, the proposed co-respondent mechanism raises doubts due to its complexity; moreover, the prior involvement of the EU Court of Justice in the proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights might have a negative impact on the access to justice under the ECHR. The article also raises the question on the future application of the presumption of equivalent protection. Finally, it is summed up that the conclusion that the EU accession to the ECHR will certainly enhance the coherence and efficiency of human rights protection in Europe is premature.