scholarly journals Jurisprudence of the European court of human rights in the choice of precautionary measures in criminal proceedings: legal realities and perspectives

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (Especial II) ◽  
pp. 443-458
Author(s):  
Svitlana Romantsova ◽  
Igor Zinkovskyy ◽  
Ruslan Komisarchuk ◽  
Olha Balatska ◽  
Lesia Strelbitska
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Precautionary Measures ◽  
The Right ◽  
Method Analysis ◽  
Selection Of

The article deals with the problems of application of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the selection of precautionary measures in criminal cases in accordance with Ukrainian law. Since the procedural legislation of Ukraine is currently not perfect in the framework of the establishment and regulation of the application of precautionary measures, the decisions of the ECHR serve as an indispensable regulator of this issue. The objective of the work is to study the peculiarities of the application of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights in the selection of precautionary measures in criminal proceedings. The subject of the investigation is the jurisprudence of the ECHR in the context of the choice of precautionary measures in the criminal process. The research methodology included and combined the dialectical method, logical and legal method, analysis, synthesis. By way of conclusion, the study shows that the practice of the ECHR is mandatory to take into account not only the courts but also the investigators and prosecutors, who legally have the right to request the court to apply such precautionary measures.

scholarly journals Human Rights Waiver in Criminal Proceedings in Terms of the European Court of Human Rights: ‘Russian Cases’

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 50-58
Author(s):  
Irina Chebotareva ◽  
Olesia Pashutina ◽  
Irina Revina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Widespread Occurrence ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Government ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right

The article investigates the general position of the European Court of Human Rights on the admissibility and validity of the waiver of rights, the features of the European mechanism for protecting human rights in case of the waiver of the right; studies the case-law practices in criminal cases of the Court in relation to Russia where the Court considered the presence/absence of the waiver of the right. The practice of the ECHR reveals the widespread occurrence of human rights violations in the Russian criminal proceedings with the alleged waiver of the right in the framework of criminal procedure. These includes the situations when the Government claimed that the Applicant had waived his/her right and the Applicant did not agree with this fact and insisted that he had been deprived of the opportunity to exercise his/her right. According to the ECHR, violations of human rights established in the Convention are related not only to shortcomings in the legal system but also to improper law enforcement that does not comply with the Convention requirements. Based on the analysis of the ECHR’s general approaches to the waiver of the right, the authors revealed the compliance of the Russian criminal procedure with the requirements of the Court to the waiver of the right and the guarantees established for it. To achieve the objectives in the HUDOC database of the European Court, using search requests we identified cases against Russia considered by the Chamber and the Grand Chamber, in which the ECHR examined the issue of the presence/absence of the waiver of the right in the criminal procedure. As a result, 40 judgments in which the Court directly considered the issue of the presence/absence of the waiver of the right in the criminal procedure in Russia were selected. We studied and analysed the selected judgments.

Does the Injunction Gap Violate Implementers’ Fair Trial Rights Under the ECHR?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léon E Dijkman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
European Convention ◽  
The Past ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Federal Supreme ◽  
Validity Of A Patent

Abstract Germany is one of few jurisdictions with a bifurcated patent system, under which infringement and validity of a patent are established in separate proceedings. Because validity proceedings normally take longer to conclude, it can occur that remedies for infringement are imposed before a decision on the patent’s validity is available. This phenomenon is colloquially known as the ‘injunction gap’ and has been the subject of increasing criticism over the past years. In this article, I examine the injunction gap from the perspective of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Art. 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. I find that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights interpreting this provision supports criticism of the injunction gap, because imposing infringement remedies with potentially far-reaching consequences before the validity of a patent has been established by a court of law arguably violates defendants’ right to be heard. Such reliance on the patent office’s grant decision is no longer warranted in the light of contemporary invalidation rates. I conclude that the proliferation of the injunction gap should be curbed by an approach to a stay of proceedings which is in line with the test for stays as formulated by Germany’s Federal Supreme Court. Under this test, courts should stay infringement proceedings until the Federal Patent Court or the EPO’s Board of Appeal have ruled on the validity of a patent whenever it is more likely than not that it will be invalidated.

Lachiri v Belgium and Bans on Wearing Islamic Dress in the Courtroom: An Emerging Trend

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-53
Author(s):  
Kaushik Paul
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Public Spaces ◽  
Religious Liberty ◽  
Recent Case ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
Islamic Dress

In recent years, the wearing of Islamic dress in public spaces and elsewhere has generated widespread controversy all over Europe. The wearing of the hijab and other Islamic veils has been the subject of adjudication before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) on many occasions. The most recent case before the ECtHR as to the prohibition on wearing the hijab is Lachiri v Belgium. In this case, the ECtHR held that a prohibition on wearing the hijab in the courtroom constitutes an infringement of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which guarantees the right to freedom of religion or belief. From the perspective of religious freedom, the ruling of the Strasbourg Court in Lachiri is very significant for many reasons. The purpose of this comment is critically to analyse the ECtHR's decision in Lachiri from the standpoint of religious liberty.

Extradition Between European and African Countries: Overcoming the Challenges

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-319
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
African Countries ◽  
European Court ◽  
Real Risk ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

Although EU states use the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) for the purpose of surrendering a person who is accused of committing an offence or who has been convicted of an offence, they use extradition when dealing with countries outside the EU. However, they use surrender when dealing with the International Criminal Court (ICC). Thus, extradition is one of the ways in which African and European countries (especially EU members) are cooperating in the fight against crime. Case law from courts in some African and European countries and from the European Court of Human Rights, the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture, shows that extraditions between African and European countries have been delayed or hampered by allegations of human rights violations in the requesting state. These allegations have focused on mainly two rights: the right to a fair trial and the right to freedom from torture. The European Court of Human Rights has held that the extradition of a person should not go ahead if his or her trial was or will amount to a flagrant denial of justice or where there is a real risk of being subjected to torture. Although African courts and international human rights bodies have also held that extradition should not go ahead where there is a real risk that the person will be subjected to torture or where his/her trial will be unfair, they have not adopted the ‘flagrant denial of justice’ test. The case law also shows that some people have challenged the legal basis for their extradition. This article highlights this case law and suggests ways in which some of the challenges associated with extradition could be overcome. The article demonstrates that courts in some African and European countries have considered the nature of extradition enquiries. In some countries, such as Kenya, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings. However, in the United Kingdom, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings of a special type. There is consensus that extradition enquiries are not civil proceedings.

4. The course of the trial

Evidence ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 140-200
Author(s):  
Roderick Munday
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Trial Judge ◽  
The Core ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right

Titles in the Core Text series take the reader straight to the heart of the subject, providing focused, concise, and reliable guides for students at all levels. This chapter discusses the following: the right to begin; the role of the trial judge; the judge’s right to call a witness; examination-in-chief; hostile witnesses; cross-examination; re-examination; calling evidence relating to witnesses’ veracity; witness support; the Crown’s right to reopen its case; and special protections extended to various classes of witness in criminal cases. Many of the rules apply to civil and criminal proceedings alike. However, as elsewhere in this book, the accent will be on rules of criminal evidence.

scholarly journals Theoretical Tools for Studying the Phenomenon of the Influence of the European Court of Human Rights Practice on Legal Activities in Ukraine

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (85) ◽  
pp. 20-30
Author(s):  
В. А. Завгородній
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Scientific Intelligence ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Practice Research ◽  
Human Rights Practice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Research Problems ◽  
General Scientific ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Selection Of

In this article, the existing approaches to general theoretical jurisprudence have been studied to understand the concept of «methodology» and its structure, on the basis of which the methodology of the European Court of Human Rights practice research and its influence on legal activity in Ukraine is determined. In the opinion of the owner, the most suitable for solving our research tasks is an approach in which the methodology of legal knowledge includes methodological tools and other designs, logically distributed by the conceptual and instrumental levels.As a result, the study found that the theoretical toolkit for the study of the phenomenon of influencing the practice of the European Court of Human Rights on legal activity in Ukraine are: a) universal epistemological principles (comprehensiveness, completeness, historicism, objectivity), which are the imperative requirements that guided the researcher; b) human-centered and sociological methodological paradigms that are interconnected, do not contradict and complement each other, as well as the provisions of the theories of legal influence, legal regulation, legal practice, law-making, legal interpretation, enforcement, legal relations, which became the basis for the formulation of research problems; c) anthropological, complex, dialectical, synergetic, axiological approaches, by which the strategy of scientific intelligence is determined, its specific perspective, selection of investigated facts and interpretation of research results are carried out; d) general scientific and special methods of cognition that ensure the receipt of true scientifically sound knowledge about the subject of research.

scholarly journals Exhaustion of domestic remedies as a condition of lodging a complaint before the European Court of Human Rights

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 168-173
Author(s):  
Tamara Gerasimenko
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Scientific Methods ◽  
European Court ◽  
International Court ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Right

The subject. The article is devoted to the subject of the exhaustion of domestic remediesbefore filing a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights.The purpose. The purpose of this article is to show and reveal the characteristics of suchimportant condition of lodging a complaint before the European Court of Human Rights asthe exhaustion of domestic remedies.The methodology. The following scientific methods have been used to write this article:analysis, comparing and making conclusions.Results, scope of application. The right of individual petition is rightly considered to be thehallmark and the greatest achievement of the European Convention on Human Rights. Individualswho consider that their human rights have been violated have the possibility oflodging a complaint before the European Court of Human Rights. However, there are importantadmissibility requirements set out in the Convention that must be satisfied beforea case be examined. Applicants are expected to have exhausted their domestic remediesand have brought their complaints within a period of six months from the date of the finaldomestic decision. The obligation to exhaust domestic remedies forms part of customaryinternational law, recognized as such in the case – law of the International Court of Justice.The rationale for the exhaustion rule is to give the national authorities, primarily the courts,the opportunity to prevent or put right the alleged violation of the Convention. The domesticlegal order should provide an effective remedy for violations of Convention rights.Conclusions. The rule of exhaustion of domestic remedies is an important part of the functioningof the protection system under the Convention and its basic principle. 

scholarly journals JUSTIFICATION OF SUSPICION DURING THE APPLICATION OF CRIMINAL PROCEEDING MEASURES

2021 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 169-174
Author(s):  
Maryna Savchuk ◽  
◽  
Artem Shapar ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Scientific Article ◽  
Precautionary Measure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Offense ◽  
Criminal Proceeding ◽  
European Court ◽  
Criminal Procedure Law ◽  
Precautionary Measures

The scientific article contains information on the study of the concept of «reasonableness of suspicion», the study by the investigating judge of the evidence that substantiates the suspicion during the application of precautionary measures. The article analyzes scientific works on certain topics, decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and national legislation. The main problem is identified, which is related to the fact that the investigating judge in most cases, when considering a request for a measure of restraint, ignores the need to examine the evidence related to the examination of suspicion. The result of the above material is the fact that the notification of a person of suspicion can in no way justify the application of measures to ensure criminal proceedings. An important procedural step, which plays a crucial role in the pre-trial investigation stage, is the notification of a person of suspicion. Suspicion is presented to a person only on the basis of proper, admissible, sufficient and reliable evidence, it allows to suspect a person of committing a criminal offense. The pre-trial investigation body does not always establish all sufficient grounds for such a suspicion, so the question arises as to its validity. After the notification of suspicion, it is possible to apply one of the measures to ensure criminal proceedings, namely: a precautionary measure. The norms of the criminal procedure law oblige the court, when choosing a measure of restraint, to take into account the data underlying such a decision. The presence of a notice of suspicion is not an identical notion of the validity of the suspicion. In order to substantiate the suspicion, the parties to the criminal proceedings are obliged to provide the investigating judge with evidence of the circumstances to which they refer, which in turn entails the duty of the investigating judge, the court to verify and evaluate the evidence. The presence of risks does not justify the suspicion. The need to comply with the rule on the verification of «reasonableness of suspicion» is realized by establishing criteria that should be investigated and established by the investigating judge during the consideration of motions for the application of measures to ensure criminal proceedings.

Does the Unborn Child Have a Right to Life? The Insufficient Answer of the European Court of Human Rights in the Judgment Vo v. France

2006 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 433-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jakob Pichon
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Pregnant Woman ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Unborn Child ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Right To Life ◽  
European Court ◽  
French Court ◽  
The Right

In the July 8, 2004 case of Vo v. France, the European Court of Human Rights (“ECtHR”) dealt with the question of whether the embryo/fetus (“the fetus”) enjoys the protection of the right to life provided by Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”). Below, a pregnant woman lost her fetus due to an error made by the attending doctor, and the Cour de Cassation, the French court of last instance, acquitted the doctor of involuntary homicide on the grounds that a fetus is not a person within the meaning of the French Criminal Code. Claiming a violation of her child's right to life within the meaning of the Convention, the woman appealed to the ECtHR. The ECtHR left open the question whether or not a fetus falls within the scope of Article 2; declaring that, even assuming Article 2 was applicable to a fetus, there had been no failure by France to comply with its obligations under Article 2, because the ECtHR deemed the institution of criminal proceedings unnecessary. Rather, it considered the possibility for the applicant to bring an action for damages as sufficient and therefore found that there had been no violation of the fetus's right to life.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document