European Convention of Human Rights

Europe is currently experiencing a "refugee crisis", demonstrated by millions of displaced people unseen since World War II. This book examines the interface between the EU's response to irregular flows, in particular the main extraterritorial border and migration controls taken by the Member States, and the rights asylum seekers acquire from EU law.

"Remote control" techniques, such as the imposition of visas, fines on carriers transporting unsatisfactorily documented third-country nationals, and interception at sea are investigated in detail in a bid to assess the impact these measures have on access to asylum in the EU. The book also thoroughly analyses the rights recognised by the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights to persons in need of international protection, inclusive of the principle of non-refoulement, the right to leave any country including one's own, the right to asylum, and the right to remedies and effective judicial protection.

The fundamental focus of the book is the relationship between the aforementioned border and migration controls and the rights of asylum seekers and, most importantly, how these rights (should) limit the scope of such measures and the ways in which they are implemented. The ultimate goal is to conclude whether the current series of extraterritorial mechanisms of pre-entry vetting is compatible in EU law with the EU rights of forced migrants.

Les auteurs proposent une réflexion sur l’impact que pourraient avoir les récents développements en droit international des droits de l’homme sur les revendications foncières des peuples autochtones au regard de la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme. Ils entendent montrer l’existence d’un lien entre l’émergence d’un pluralisme juridique dans le droit international des droits de l’homme et la reconnaissance d’un droit de propriété autochtone originaire.

It is sometimes argued that the non-therapeutic, non-consensual alteration of children’s genitals should be discussed in two separate ethical discourses: one for girls (in which such alterations should be termed ‘female genital mutilation’ or FGM), and one for boys (in which such alterations should be termed ‘male circumcision’). In this article, I call into question the moral and empirical basis for such a distinction, and argue that all children—whether female, male, or intersex—should be free from having parts of their genitals removed unless there is a pressing medical indication.

Press freedom plays a significant role in creating public awareness via accurately informing the society. It performs this duty within the framework of respect to diversity of opinions and individual right to self-governance, which is particularly indispensable to liberal democracies.
Press freedom is a different form of freedom of expression, which is included in the most fundamental human rights documents such as the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN Universal Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Freedom of expression has been protected under Article 10 of the ECHR. This article draws the boundaries of this right as freedom to hold opinions and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. The article then instructs the acceptable limits of this freedom. In order for a restriction of freedom of expression be valid, it must be prescribed by law first, and secondly, it must be necessary in a democratic society, and finally it must be only aimed for the listed legitimate causes as specified in this article.
Despite the protection of the ECHR Article 10, Turkey has seen frequent interventions on the press due to political pressure and the ownership structure of the media in the country. And consequently, numerous violation judgments have been delivered by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which will be analyzed in terms the reasons for violations and the cases of legitimate restrictions on press freedom. Additionally, this book will give a detailed trajectory of press freedom in Turkey in the light of court decisions, European Union Progress Reports and statements of press unions.

This chapter investigates whether the Holocaust was the catalyst for the adoption of a number of seminal texts in the postwar 'human rights revolution', including the United Nations Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). An examination of published and archival source material reveals that the negotiations over the drafting of these documents were marked by a total or near-total silence on the mass murder of Jews. The article concludes with an analysis of why during the drafting process the framers of these texts, including Jewish delegates whose family members had been killed in the Holocaust, refrained from invoking the slaughter of European Jewry at the same time as they called attention to other Nazi crimes.

[For a more in-depth analysis of the Holocaust origins of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, see my 2012 article in the Journal of Genocide Research]

La Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo ha affermato, sin dalla sua celebre sentenza Mathieu-Mohin et Clerfayt, che l'articolo 3 del primo Protocollo addizionale alla CEDU, il quale consacra il diritto a libere elezioni, riveste un'importanza capitale nel sistema della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell'uomo. Tale disposizione consacra, secondo la Corte, un principio caratteristico di un regime politico effettivamente democratico, quest'ultimo voluto dallo stesso Preambolo della Convezione, sul quale riposa essenzialmente la tutela delle libertà fondamentali. Il principio si rende applicabile non soltanto ai sistemi elettorali nazionali, ma anche agli organi rappresentativi sovranazionali e non puramente interni, come l'ha riconosciuto la Corte nei confronti del Parlamento europeo con occasione della sua nota sentenza Matthews. Il presente lavoro ha per scopo quello di esaminare il trattamento che la summenzionata Corte ha riservato negli anni a tale diritto, con particolare riguardo al diritto di voto, che ne è una componente essenziale, sottolineando la significazione che la sua giurisprudenza ha conferito alla serie di nozioni interdipendenti "libere elezioni -regime democratico -libertà fondamentali". Saranno esaminati i diversi casi che hanno maggiormente contribuito a dargli una definizione ed una precisa portata, attraverso l'esame della nozione di diritto di voto, passivo e attivo, le condizioni di eleggibilità nonché l'ineleggibilità, così come contornati dalla Corte, con riferimento anche agli standard stabiliti dalla stessa in materia di sistemi elettorali. Particolare attenzione meriteranno, infine, i casi in cui, come nel caso Partito comunista russo ed altri c. Russia, la Corte ha esaminato ricorsi in cui si eccepiva la disuguale copertura mediatica che i media avevano dato ai diversi partiti politici durante la campagna elettorale.

Це пояснюється тим, що кримінологічна експертиза нормативно-правових актів охоплює більш широке коло питань, оскільки її основним завданням є оцінювання можливих кримінальних наслідків реалізації нормативно-правових актів в різних сферах життя суспільства.

1. La recente decisione con la quale il Governo brasiliano ha riconosciuto lo status di rifugiato politico a Cesare Battisti, negando in tal modo l'estradizione richiesta dall'Italia, ha dato luogo, com'è noto, ad una controversia tra l'Italia e il Brasile che solleva questioni giuridiche di particolare interesse.

Europe's Transforming Identity. Part 1 of the book Islam and Tolerance in Wider Europe (ed. Pamela Kilpadi) including the articles:
* 'What Values for Europe?' by Michael Emerson
* 'The Role of Islam in Europe: Multiple Crises?' by Amel Boubekeur and Samir Amghar
* 'The Southern Gate to Fortress Europe' by Rutvica Andrijasevic

У статті досліджується розвиток стандартів прав людини, гарантованих Європейською конвенцією з прав людини, крізь призму європейського праворозуміння. Автор аналізує рішення Європейського суду з прав людини щодо тлумачення та ефективного забезпечення прав і основних свобод людини, а також практику їх застосування в Україні. Key words: human rights, dynamic interpretation, consensus, autonomous interpretation,margin of appreciation, principle of proportionality.

The fundamental question addressed is whether there is any compelling or convincing argument (s) vis-à-vis to changing our Human Rights Act 1998 and replacing it with a distinctively British Bill of Rights. The overarching theme of this paper is that our human rights should not be based on what our government finds convenient, acceptable or compatible with its electoral aims. Any change to our Human Rights Act should only serve to further bolster human rights protection and not in any way whatsoever water-down, in this author’s view, the fairly minimalist status quo.

У статті досліджуються питання, пов’язані з особливостями тлумачення і застосування статті 3 Європейської конвенції з прав людини у практиці Європейського суду з прав людини. Зокрема, проаналізовано зміст статті 3, визначено, що необхідно розуміти під поняттями катування, нелюдське чи таке, що принижує гідність, поводження або покарання. Розкрито матеріальні і процесуальні аспекти порушень заборони катувань, а також позитивні і негативні зобов’язання держави щодо ефективного забезпечення і захисту відповідного права. Проаналізовано стандарти належної оцінки жорстокого поводження та основні аспекти юридичної кваліфікації певної форми поганого поводження як катування. Зазначено процесуальні гарантії, які повинні бути забезпечені кожній особі на досудовій стадії розслідування, недотримання яких спричиняє порушення статті 3 Конвенції.
Key words: torture, inhuman treatment or punishment, degrading treatment/punishment, effective investigation, medical examination, substantive violation, procedural violation.

CRONACA Il disegno di legge di autorizzazione alla ratifica ed esecuzione dei Protocolli 15 e 16 alla Convenzione europea dei diritti dell'uomo: audizioni parlamentari. -Nel corso dell'esame parlamentare del disegno di legge di autorizzazione alla ratifica ed esecuzione dei Protocolli nn. 15 e 16 dinanzi alle Commissioni giustizia e affari esteri della Camera si sono svolte a partire dal 12 febbraio 2019 diverse audizioni informali, ultimate l'11 febbraio 2020, con la partecipazione di docenti universitari, di un rappresentante dell'Unione delle camere penali, del rappresentante permanente dell'Italia presso il Consiglio d'Europa, dell'attuale giudice italiano presso la Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo e dei suoi predecessori nonché dei presidenti delle giurisdizioni supreme italiane (Corte di cassazione, Consiglio di Stato e Corte dei conti).

A mű szerzői jogilag védett. Minden jog, így különösen a sokszorosítás, terjesztés és fordítás joga fenntartva. A mű a kiadó írásbeli hozzájárulása nélkül részeiben sem reprodukálható, elektronikus rendszerek felhasználásával nem dolgozható fel, azokban nem tárolható, azokkal nem sokszorosítható és nem terjeszthető.

The main aim of this article is to discuss the essence and distinctive features of the margin of appreciation doctrine in the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. In accordance with Protocol No. 14, all Council of Europe member States have an obligation to apply a margin of appreciation. It is worth mentioning that in the text of the Convention and in the preparatory work there is no such term as «margin of appreciation». Nevertheless, this doctrine is well established in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights (in the case of Handyside v. the United Kingdom etc.). The guarantees enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights are a minimum standard. The European Court of Human Rights doesn’t define, how exactly the States must secure these rights. Thus, the member States enjoy the margins of appreciation, that is, the national authorities are better placed to settle a dispute than the Strasbourg institutions (so-called the better position rationale)....

Nei primi cinque lustri successivi al trattato di Roma del 1957, gli organismi europei non hanno tenuto in alcuna considerazione il tema della cittadinanza. L’“Europa dei popoli” non costituiva oggetto né di corpus giuridico ad hoc né di riferimento all’interno di contesti più generali. Questa visione “merceologica” confinava, nel passato che non diventava presente, le grandi personalità culturali e politiche che avevano espresso nei loro scritti e nelle loro azioni l’ideale di un’Europa che teneva al primo posto gli abitanti, considerati protagonisti e non “attori muti”. L’istituzione di una cittadinanza europea, introdotta dal TUE nel 1992, è da considerarsi un apprezzabile passo avanti sul piano dell’integrazione, ma per il futuro bisognerà partire dal presupposto che se gli Stati membri dell’Unione non saranno veramente uniti, difficilmente potranno essere in grado di fronteggiare le grandi sfide poste dal multipolare scacchiere geopolitico e geoeconomico mondiale

"La legge n. 92 del 2012 ha apportato alcune modifiche alla disciplina dei licenziamenti collettivi, consistenti in una serie di cambiamenti alla procedura prescritta dalla legge n. 223 del 1991.
Questa riforma riveste una portata rilevante in termini sia pratici che di sistema. Essa, infatti, da un lato, si colloca all’interno di un’ importante revisione degli ammortizzatori sociali, con abolizione, seppure non immediata, dell’indennità di mobilità, dall’altro interviene su due profili, oggetto di massimo interesse da parte del legislatore comunitario e molto significativi della regolazione: quello della correttezza dello svolgimento della procedura di informazione e consultazione e quello, strettamente complementare al primo, delle conseguenze sanzionatorie in caso di vizi della medesima"

I. Inleiding: toenemende kritiek op het EHRM
II. De impact van het EVRM op de rechtspraak van vier hoogste nationale rechtscolleges
A. De Nederlandse Hoge Raad tussen monisme en het toetsingsverbod
B. Het VK Supreme Court en de duplicatie van EVRM-rechten via de Human Rights Act 1998
C. Onrechtstreekste toetsing aan het EVRM door het Belgische Grondwettelijk Hof
D. Het Duitse Federaal Grondwettelijk Hof gespleten tussen dualisme en openheid
III. De impact van de rechtspraak van het EHRM op de rechtspraak van vier hoogste nationale rechtscolleges
A. De Nederlandse Hoge Raad en de incorporatietheorie
B. VK Supreme Court en de spiegelbenadering
C. De volgzaamheid van het Belgische Grondwettelijk Hof
D. De zeldzame verwijzingen door het Duitse Federaal Grondwettelijk Hof
E. Een vergelijkend overzicht
IV. Grenzen aan het volgen van de rechtspraak van het EHRM
A. Het overstijgen van de ‘minimumstandaard’ en het invullen van de appreciatiemarge
B. Gebrek aan heldere en consistente rechtspraak van het EHRM
C. Weigering om rechtspraak van het EHRM te volgen
1. Het EHRM heeft de nationale juridische context misverstaan of de impact van de rechtspraak verkeerd ingeschat
2. Onverenigbaar met de grondwettelijke kern of met een fundamenteel materieel of procedureel aspect van het nationaal recht
V. Conclusie

Sommario: Analisi dei fatti precedenti al ricorso e doglianze relative ai principi rilevanti in tema di esaurimento dei rimedi interni-Pronuncia della Corte e orientamento dei giudici sul concetto di "vita privata"-Opinione dissenziente dei giudici Bianku e Kjølbro e possibili sviluppi in materia di videosorveglianza nei luoghi di lavoro La sentenza Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo, Sez. I, 28 novembre 2017, ric. n. 70838/13 si inscrive nella (già significativa) giurisprudenza della Corte di Strasburgo sulla videosorveglianza dei luoghi di lavoro e sulla difficile conciliabilità col diritto alla privacy del lavoratore, prendendo, però, in considerazione un caso inedito e, per diverse ragioni, peculiare. Infatti, nel caso in commento, non solo il datore di lavoro è un Ateneo, ma l'installazione delle telecamere era avvenuta nelle aule universitarie e, in conseguenza, i lavoratori ripresi sono dei professori universitari. Analisi dei fatti precedenti al ricorso e doglianze relative ai principi rilevanti in tema di esaurimento dei rimedi interni Con sentenza del 28 novembre 2017, resa nel caso Antović e Mirković c. Montenegro, la Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo è tornata a pronunciarsi sulla questione della videosorveglianza dei luoghi di lavoro, questa volta in un caso, delicato per i motivi che diremo, riguardante l'installazione di telecamere all'interno di un Ateneo. Come noto, nella giurisprudenza della Corte di Strasburgo era già emerso il problematico contemperamento tra l'esigenza del datore di lavoro di garantire la sicurezza del proprio patrimonio, anche immobiliare, e il diritto alla vita privata ex art. 8 CEDU di coloro che prestano un'attività lavorativa a suo favore. Nel caso in commento, però, tale contemperamento assume una maggiore rilevanza e complessità, dato che l'installazione delle telecamere è avvenuta nelle aule universitarie, intese come "luogo pubblico", e i lavoratori ripresi sono dei professori universitari.

Wie weit Rechtsgarantien an territorialen Grenzen reichen und wie der Zugang zu Schutz für Asylsuchende sichergestellt werden kann, sind Fragen, die in den letzten Jahren vor dem Europäischen Gerichtshof für Menschenrechte (EGMR) einflussreich verhandelt wurden. Der EGMR war ein wichtiger Akteur im europäischen Flüchtlingsschutz und die Verfahren vor dem Gerichtshof waren oft auch Anlässe der öffentlichen Auseinandersetzung über Menschenrechtsschutz im Zusammenhang mit Migration. Zuletzt entschied der EGMR nun in einem lang anhängigen Fall über Rechte an der Grenze von Melilla. 2 Die spanische Exklave auf dem Afrikanischen Kontinent grenzt an Marokko, es konzentrieren sich dort Bemühungen von Migrant*innen, Europa zu erreichen, einerseits und eine massive Abschottungspolitik andererseits. Der Fall N.D. und N.T. betraf Vorfälle vom August 2014, als die beiden späteren Antragsteller versucht hatten, die Zäune der Grenzanlage zu überwinden und nach Spanien zu gelangen. Sie wurden von spanischen Beamten festgenommen und umgehend nach Marokko zurückgebracht, in Frage stand bei dem Verfahren eine Verletzung des Verbots der Kollektivausweisung. Nach einem bereits im Oktober 2017 ergangenen Kammerurteil, 3 welches die Vorgänge als eine solche Verletzung bewertete, entschied die Große Kammer nun im Februar 2020 anders und sah darin keine Verletzung. Das Urteil rief massive Kritik hervor. 4 Widersprüchlich ist besonders, wie das Gericht die Migration in Gruppen behandelt: Einerseits soll das Verbot der Kollektivausweisung gerade diejenigen schützen, die als Teil einer Gruppe gesehen werden. Andererseits führt der Gerichtshof aber die Tatsache, dass die Antragsteller als Teil einer Gruppe versuchten, die Zäune zu überwinden, bei der Begründung an, weshalb diese Rechtsgarantie vorliegend eingeschränkt sei. Der Beitrag 1 Für wertvolle Kommentare gilt mein Dank Andreas Fischer-Lescano, Nora Markard, sowie Robin Celikates, Stefan Gosepath und den TeilnehmerInnen ihres Kolloquiums an der FU Berlin vom 3.

This paper investigates and advocates for the potentials of a direct engagement with the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) by constitutional courts through a comparative analysis encompassing six Western European countries. It first shows that, although it does not generally enjoy constitutional rank, the Convention serves as a standard for constitutional review, as constitutional courts have incorporated it into their constitutional yardsticks through various techniques. It then stresses that this has not molded constitutional courts into mere agents of the Strasbourg court, because they have also developed a series of limitations to avoid a mechanical transposition of Strasbourg case-law into the domestic legal order. Finally, it highlights the benefits of the Convention's integration into the constitutional yardstick by arguing that this enhances domestic compliance with the Convention, strengthens the legitimacy of the Convention system, and fosters judicial dialogue. Overall, by directly engaging with the ECHR and with Stras

1. PRETENSIONES.

2. LA EJECUCIÓN DE LAS SENTENCIAS ESTIMATORIAS DEL TRIBUNAL EUROPEO DE DERECHOS HUMANOS CUANDO AFECTAN A PERSONAS PRIVADAS DE LIBERTAD

3. NOVEDADES EN LA DELIMITACIÓN DE LOS DERECHOS FUNDAMENTALES
3.1. La dimensión procesal de determinados derechos sustantivos.
3.2. El contenido positivo de los derechos fundamentales
3.3. La aparición de la democracia militante

4. LA JURISPRUDENCIA EUROPEA Y EL TRIBUNAL CONSTITUCIONAL ESPAÑOL.
4.1. La influencia limitada de la jurisprudencia europea: los asuntos pendientes
4.2. La jurisprudencia constitucional como objeto de control

5. LA JURISPRUDENCIA EUROPEA Y EL LEGISLADOR ESPAÑOL

6. EL MARGEN DE APRECIACIÓN NACIONAL: ENTRE LA COMPRENSIÓN Y EL EXCESO
6.1. Libertad de expresión y anuncios profesionales de abogados
6.2. La ilegalización de los partidos políticos y la libertad de asociación (art. 11.1 CEDH)
6.3. El matrimonio gitano
6.4. La Sentencia sobre el Prestige

7. LA JURISPRUDENCIA EUROPEA Y EL PODER JUDICIAL ESPAÑOL
7.1. Derecho de acceso a la justicia
7.2. Derecho a un juez imparcial
7.3. Derecho a un proceso con todas las garantías
7.4. Derecho de defensa
7.5. Derecho a obtener una resolución judicial motivada
    7.5.1. La motivación como elemento inescindible de la labor judicial
    7.5.2. La no incorporación de datos íntimos en las resoluciones judiciales
7.6. Derecho al recurso
    7.6.1. Generalidades
    7.6.2. La jurisprudencia relacionada con el recurso de casación
7.7. Derecho a un proceso sin dilaciones indebidas
7.8. Garantías vinculadas con el proceso penal
    7.8.1. El principio de legalidad penal (art. 7.1 CEDH)
    7.8.2. El derecho a ser informado de la acusación (art. 6.3.a) CEDH)
    7.8.3. Las privaciones de libertad judicialmente decretadas (arts. 5.1 y 5.3 CEDH)
    7.8.4. La presunción de inocencia (art. 6.2 CEDH)
    7.8.5. La inmediación penal en segunda instancia (art. 2 del Protocolo 7 CEDH)

8. LA JURISPRUDENCIA EUROPEA Y LA ADMINISTRACIÓN: LAS PRIVACIONES DE LIBERTAD (ART. 5.1 CEDH)
8.1. Las privaciones de libertad (art. 5.1. CEDH)
8.2. La responsabilidad patrimonial de la Administración y el derecho de propiedad (art. 1 del Protocolo 1 CEDH)

9. LA JURISPRUDENCIA EUROPEA Y LOS PARTICULARES
9.1. La libertad de expresión en el ámbito laboral (art. 10.1 CEDH)
9.2. Las libertades comunicativas y el derecho a la intimidad (arts. 10.1 y 8.1 CEDH)
9.3. La eventual incidencia de la negociación colectiva en el derecho de propiedad (art. 1 Protocolo 1 CEDH)

10. LOS DERECHOS INVOCADOS (REMISIÓN)

Nell’attuale quadro normativo europeo i riferimenti al dato culturale sono molteplici, ma è ancora assente una trattazione organica del tema e il settore di riferimento è la cultura considerata in senso più ampio, secondo quanto disposto dall’art. 151 del tce, ora articolo 167 del tfue. Il diritto dei beni culturali sembra rimanere confinato nelle frontiere nazionali. È evidente, pertanto, che l’azione dell’Unione europea sia rivolta al plurale concorrendo, quindi, allo sviluppo “delle culture” degli Stati membri e non di una cultura propriamente europea. Nel settore dei beni culturali l’attività normativa di diritto secondario ha avuto come obiettivo quello di conciliare nel mercato interno la libera circolazione dei beni culturali con le esigenze di protezione degli stessi. Prima dell’adozione del regolamento 3911/92, relativo all’esportazione dei beni culturali, e della direttiva 7/93, relativa alla restituzione dei beni culturali usciti illecitamente dal territorio di uno Stato membro, gli Stati si limitavano, infatti, ad effettuare controlli alle frontiere esclusivamente con riguardo ai beni rientranti nel proprio patrimonio

The final version of this article has been published in
Cambridge International Law Journal, Vol. 7 No. 2, December 2018, pp. 225–240
https://doi.org/10.4337/cilj.2018.02.03

This article analyses the doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights about the right of free elections established in Article 3 of the Protocol 1, primary only as a mandate for States and later as a genuine subjective right, with the goal to achieve a solid theory of the right of the free elections in Europe. The article aims to spell out the precise content of the right to free elections in Europe as stipulated by the ECtHR.

SOMMARIO: 1. Premessa. – 2. Il rango della Cedu e dei suoi protocolli nel sistema delle fonti italiane. – 3. La forza vincolante delle sentenze della Corte di Strasburgo per l'ordina-mento italiano. – 4. Il ruolo rispettivo dei giudici comuni e della Corte costituzionale nel-l'adeguamento dell'ordinamento italiano agli obblighi convenzionali. – 5. I rapporti tra la Cedu (e relativi protocolli) e la Carta dei diritti fondamentali dell'UE.

Dubbele bestraffing voor hetzelfde feit is conform het ne bis in idembeginsel verboden. Dit beginsel is neergelegd in art. 4 Zevende Protocol EVRM. Nederland heeft het Procotol niet geratificeerd, maar ne bis in idem heeft als rechtsbeginsel toch gelding. In 2016 oordeelde het EHRM dat samenloop van strafrechtelijke vervolging met een bestuursrechtelijke sanctie onder voorwaarden is toegestaan, indien beide procedures een voldoende hecht verband hebben qua inhoud en in de tijd. Aan de inhoudelijke voorwaarden is voldaan indien: beide procedures complementaire doelen dienen, het gebruik van twee wegen voorzienbaar is, een herhaling van de vaststelling en de beoordeling van het bewijs zo veel mogelijk wordt vermeden en de totale strafoplegging proportioneel is. Het Hof van Justitie EU blijkt het EHRM te volgen, maar op punten biedt het EHRM of het HvJ EU meer rechtsbescherming. Het HvJ EU stelt geen hoge eisen aan het vereiste temporele verband, maar biedt wel bescherming in meer dan één lidstaat.

In het bestuursrecht geldt een lagere bewijslast dan in het strafrecht. Toch hoeft dat niet tot schending van de onschuldpresumptie te leiden. Art. 4 Zevende Protocol EVRM hoeft geen beletsel te vormen voor de ratificatie door Nederland van het Protocol. Via het EU-recht werkt het beginsel al in de Nederlandse rechtsorde en Nederland mag altijd meer bescherming bieden dan het EVRM.

Whether the European Union accedes to the European Convention on Human Rights is not a foregone conclusion, or at least not to the extent that it used to be in the period 2010-2014. Even though the accession remains a self-imposed obligation of the EU (Art. 6 (2) TUE), difficulties with gearing the Convention system to the EU’s specificity, especially after the convoluted Opinion 2/13 of the CJEU, might finally turn out too
overwhelming for the Union – which currently needs to address much more urgent issues. Yet apart from the symbolic dimension of the accession (which still might rekindle some pro-European enthusiasm), this act, even viewed only from the theoretical point of view, offers a surprisingly innovative perspective of relations between international organisations and control systems of international human rights conventions. Among these relations issues related to international responsibility – and shared responsibility in particular – come to the fore. Attributing responsibility to the EU and/or its Member States after the accession is something of an uncharted territory. There exist general rules of law of international responsibility, there is case law of the ECtHR (and of the EComHR), but the exact norms governing attributing
responsibility and co-responsibility in the case of the EU are not yet fully determined. Nevertheless, they might be of considerable importance for future development of law of international responsibility of IOs.

This article will describe  the current  legal  framework on assisted  reproduction  technology  (ART) regulation in Italy, taking into account recent case-law derived from the implementation of the Law 40  of  2004  on ART.  Special  attention will  be  devoted  to  the  case  of Costa  and  Pavan  v.  Italy, recently decided by  the Tenth Session of  the European Court of Human Rights  (ECtHR).  In  that decision,  the European Court  declared  the incompatibility  of  the  ban  to  pre-implantation  genetic  diagnosis introduced by the abovementioned Italian law on ART. The case will be analysed from a  dual perspective. On the one hand, it will be considered in the light of the ECtHR case-law, in order to derive systematic aspects of continuity or discontinuity between the former and the latter. On the  other hand,  the  case will be  considered  in  the  light of  its  concrete  and prospective  impact on  the Italian legal approach to ART regulation, considering especially the direct and indirect influence of the case: e.g., its possible utilisation by Italian judges when they are called upon to implement Law 40.

This article dismisses the idea that the pilot judgment procedure at the European Court of Human Rights is an innovation and postulates that the procedure may do the court more harm than good by exceeding the court's mandate and inducing the court to act akin to a supra-national constitutional court for Europe. The article identifies and analyses all the features of the pilot judgment in the regular jurisprudence of the court and examines whether the procedural rules behind it are effective.  The article argues that if the pilot judgment procedure is to be used it should be used more methodically and that the court would be better served by improving its enforcement mechanisms rather than altering the manner in which it renders judgment.

Eszter Bodnár: All Voters are Equal but... Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law.  4/2016. 425-438.

Equal suffrage is a basic principle of democratic elections which is included in most constitutions and international human rights documents. It applies to the design of the boundaries of the political community, electoral system and electoral procedure. However, there are special cases where the effectiveness of this principle is questionable. This paper deals with two different aspects of the Hungarian regulation concerning the voting rights of Hungarian citizens living abroad. The paper gives an overview of the regulation and presents the recent constitutional disputes and relevant case law of Hungarian and European fundamental rights protection mechanisms. Finally, it opens the debate by posing some key questions on the future of the Hungarian situation and more generally, on the level of protection of voting rights before the national and international institutions. Court, right to vote. Generally, it is the constitutional power that decides on the boundaries of the political community and the scope of the voters who can participate in the elections of the most important democratically elected constitutional organs. The constitution usually determines these boundaries based on a combination of three criteria: age, nationality or other status, and residence.' The state can decide whether it gives voting rights to those who are residing outside the territory of the country or who are just abroad on the elections day. If they choose the inclusive solution, there is a large scale of regulation on the electoral system (how their votes can be transformed into mandates) and on electoral procedures (how they can cast their vote). There are quite few international human rights standards in this field because international documents and protection mechanisms usually give states a wide margin of appreciation concerning their electoral system and procedures. However, one of the most important electoral principles, namely, equal suffrage, is also applicable in this domain and can influence the range of possible solutions. This paper aims to present the current situation in Hungary concerning the right to vote of Hungarian citizens abroad, noting that the system was entirely amended before the 2014 parliamentary elections.