scholarly journals Immunity v. Human Rights Or Harmonious Interpretation? Incompatibility of the State Immunity Act with the Human Rights Act and the Right to a Remedy Under International and European Law after Benkharbouche

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katja S. Ziegler
2003 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 297-332 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Voyiakis

This comment discusses three recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in the cases of McElhinney v Ireland, Al-Adsani v UK, and Fogarty v UK. All three applications concerned the dismissal by the courts of the respondent States of claims against a third State on the ground of that State's immunity from suit. They thus raised important questions about the relation the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention)—especially the right to a fair trial and access to court enshrined in Arcticle 6(1)—and the law of State immunity.


2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 358-376
Author(s):  
Marcel Brus

This article focuses on the possibilities for victims of international crimes to obtain reparation in a foreign domestic court. The chances of success for such claims are small under traditional international law. The article questions whether the development of human rights and humanitarian ethics as a core element of international law (referred to as ius humanitatis) is having an impact on traditional obstacles to making such claims. Two elements are considered: the relevance of changing societal attitudes to the ‘rights’ of victims of such crimes and their possible effect on the interpretation and application of existing law, and whether in present-day international law humanitarian concerns have led to limiting obstacles that are still based on sovereignty, notably regarding the universality principle, prescription, and state immunity. The general conclusion is that on all these points much remains to be done.


2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-96
Author(s):  
Ronagh JA McQuigg

The European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 has now been in force in Ireland for ten years. This article analyses the Act itself and the impact which it has had on the Irish courts during the first decade of its operation. The use of the European Convention on Human Rights in the Irish courts prior to the enactment of the legislation is discussed, as are the reasons for the passing of the Act. The relationship between the Act and the Irish Constitution is examined, as is the jurisprudence of the Irish courts towards the interpretative obligation found in section 2(1), and the duty placed upon organs of the State by section 3(1). The article ends with a number of observations regarding the impact which the Act has had on the Irish courts at a more general level. Comparisons will be drawn with the uk’s Human Rights Act 1998 throughout the discussion.


2021 ◽  
Vol 66 ◽  
pp. 240-243
Author(s):  
P. Badzeliuk

This article is devoted to the study of the implementation of the fundamental right of a person to professional legal assistance through the vectors of influence of the bar, the role of the human rights institution in the mechanism of such a right and its place in public life.An effective justice system provides not only an independent and impartial judiciary, but also an independent legal profession. Lawyers play an important role in ensuring access to justice. They facilitate the interaction between individuals and legal entities and the judiciary by providing legal advice to their clients and presenting them to the courts. Without the assistance of a lawyer, the right to a fair trial and the right to an effective remedy would be irrevocably violated.Thus, the bar in the mechanism of protection of human and civil rights and freedoms is one of the means of self-limitation of state power through the creation and active functioning of an independent human rights institution, which is an active subject in the process of fundamental rights. The main constitutional function of the state is to implement and protect the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, and the constitutional and legal status of the legal profession allows it to actively ensure the rights of civil society as a whole and not just the individual. Effectively implement the human rights function of the state by ensuring proper interaction between the authorities and civil society, while being an active participant in the law enforcement mechanism and occupying an independent place in the justice system.Thus, the activities of lawyers are a complex manifestation of both state and public interest. After all, it is through advocacy and thanks to it that the rule of law realizes the possibility of ensuring the rights and freedoms of its citizens. Advocacy, on the one hand, has a constitutionally defined state character, and on the other hand, lawyers should be as independent as possible from the state in order to effectively protect citizens and legal entities from administrative arbitrariness. Thus, the bar is a unique legal phenomenon that performs a state (public-law) function, while remaining an independent, non-governmental self-governing institution.


Author(s):  
T. I. Otcheskaya

The article is devoted to topical issues of protection of human and civil rights and freedoms by an important state body — the prosecutor’s offi ce in two states — the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China. The author investigated the issue of the formation of prosecutorial supervision in the European space in the mechanism of statehood on the example of the Russian Federation and in the Asian space on the example of the People’s Republic of China.At the same time, the approaches of the two states to the protection of human rights at the constitutional level, which are regulated by the Constitution of the PRC and the Constitution of the Russian Federation, have been studied. The achievements of the Russian prosecutor’s offi ce in protecting human and civil rights and freedoms, which are the responsibility of the state, including on issues of observance of the labor rights of citizens, the right of citizens to protect life and health, are consecrated.The state program of action in the fi eld of human rights adopted by the State Council of the People’s Republic of China has also been studied in detail. Achievements in the social sphere are shown, which are provided not only by the state, but also by the prosecutor’s offi ce. The approaches of legal science in the two states are consecrated not only in the regulation of human and civil rights and freedoms, but also in their provision.Based on the material studied, the author concluded that it is possible to use the positive experience of Russia and China, mutually in both states, in order to ensure the protection of human and civil rights and freedoms in each of them.


2021 ◽  
Vol 66 (05) ◽  
pp. 145-148
Author(s):  
Ниджат Рафаэль оглу Джафаров ◽  

It can be accepted that the classification of human rights, its division, types, and groups, is of particular importance. The syllogism for human rights can be taken as follows: law belongs to man; human beings are the highest beings on earth like living beings. Therefore, the regulation prevails. The right to freedom is conditional. Man is free. Consequently, human rights are dependent. Morality is the limit of the law. Morality is the limit and content of human actions. Therefore, the law is the limit of human activities. Morality is related to law. Law is the norm of human behavior. Thereby, human behavior and direction are related to morality. The people create the state. The state has the right. Therefore, the right of the state is the right of the people. The state is an institution made up of citizens. Citizens have the privilege. Such blessings as Dignity, honor, conscience, zeal, honor, etc., and values are a part of morality and spiritual life. Morality is united with law. Therefore, moral values are part of the law. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and conscience. Space is about the law. Therefore, everyone has the right to opinion and conscience. Key words: human rights, freedom of conscience, conceptuality, citizenship


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lee Edson P. Yarcia ◽  
Jan Michael Alexandre C. Bernadas

Purpose This paper aims to examine key obligations of states to persons deprived of liberty (PDLs) under the right to health framework in the context of COVID-19. As a case study, it also describes the state of health in places of detention in the Philippines during the pandemic, with an end view of providing granular recommendations for prison policy reforms. Design/methodology/approach Relevant rules under international human rights law related to places of detention were thematically analyzed to articulate the scope of the right to health of PDLs. To describe the state of places of detention in the Philippines, this paper relied on archival research of news from selected local mainstream and specialized media. Findings The right to health framework provides a foundation for the response to COVID-19 in places of detention. Key concerns include increase in the number of infections, vulnerabilities in physical and mental health, and the spread of infection among correctional staff. Long-standing structural constraints and limited health information compound the threat of COVID-19. The Philippines must comply with its human rights obligations to PDLs to effectively address COVID-19-related concerns. Practical implications Policy reforms in Philippine places of detention must include application of community standards on physical and mental health, implementation of emergency release and application of non-custodial measures for long-term prison decongestion. Originality/value This is one of the few papers to analyze human rights in health care in places of detention during a pandemic, as nuanced in the context of the Philippines.


Author(s):  
Mark Lunney ◽  
Donal Nolan ◽  
Ken Oliphant

The right of privacy under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights was incorporated into English law by the Human Rights Act 1998, but English law as yet recognises no tort of invasion of privacy as such. Admittedly, a number of specific torts protect particular aspects of privacy, but this protection may be regarded as haphazard, incidental, and incomplete. Recent decisions, however, have seen substantial developments in the protection given to particular privacy interests, above all by adapting the law of breach of confidence to provide a remedy against the unauthorised disclosure of personal information. These issues are discussed in this chapter.


2019 ◽  
pp. 441-475
Author(s):  
Kirsty Horsey ◽  
Erika Rackley

This chapter considers two ‘land torts’: trespass to land and private nuisance. Trespass to land protects a person in possession of land against direct invasion of his property. The right to sue includes not only those with a proprietorial interest in the land, such as owners and tenants, but also those who have exclusive occupation such as squatters. The fact that any invasion of land, however minute and whether it causes damage or not, is a trespass, indicates that the primary function of this tort is to protect rights in property, rather than simply to provide compensation. The chapter continues by distinguishing between public and private nuisance. It then discusses the interests protected in private nuisance; the standard of reasonable user; the person(s) liable for nuisance; remoteness of damage; statutory authority and planning permission; and the effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 on nuisance claims.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document