ЩОДО ПРАВОВОЇ ПРИРОДИ ТА ЗНАЧЕННЯ КОНСУЛЬТАТИВНИХ ВИСНОВКІВ ЄВРОПЕЙСЬКОГО СУДУ З ПРАВ ЛЮДИНИ

The article analyzes the condition for acceptability of individual applications to the European Court of Human Rights, which was introduced by The Protocol No. 14 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the substantial damage to which the applicant suffered as well as the circumstances that introduce the reservation of paragraphs B clause 3 of the Art. 35 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and their qualification features.It has been found that the European Court of Human Rights, even assuming that the applicant did not suffer material damage cannot declare as inadmissible any individual claim that raises the question: the adoption of law, interpretation of the norms of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, national right. It has been established that the respect for human rights, even if there is a presumption that the applicant did not suffer material damage, requires announcement as an admissible by the European Court of Human Rights such an individual application, since it has raised issues of a general nature regarding the observance of the norms of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: 1) the necessity to clarify the obligations of the State under the Convention; 2) to compel the respondent State to resolve a structural problem affecting the interests of other persons in the same position as the applicant. The following conditions have been identified in the presence of which respect for human rights does not require consideration of the statement by the European Court of Human Rights: 1) the relevant national legislation and practice changed, and similar issues had already been resolved in other cases that the European Court of Human Rights reviewed; 2) the relevant law was canceled and the statement had only a historical character; 3) The European Court of Human Rights or the Council of Ministers have already considered this issue as a complex issue

Guaranteed by the Constitution of Ukraine and Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, the right to respect for private and family life for those sentenced to life imprisonment, in terms of its implementation and scope, differs from this right for free individuals. But it is undeniable that those sentenced to life imprisonment are not deprived of this right in full. This is consistently emphasized in its practice by the European Court of Human Rights. In addition to private and family life being a natural need of every individual, its realization, particularly in forms such as maintaining and supporting connections with the outside world, is a means of re-socialization for individuals undergoing punishment in the form of life imprisonment. The benchmark for the development of Ukrainian legislation and law enforcement practice is the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Therefore, the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the right to respect for private and family life for those sentenced to life imprisonment should be studied and generalized. The precondition for the further development of any scientific direction is the comprehension of what has already been done by previous researchers. The conducted research has shown that Ukrainian scientific literature has addressed the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding various aspects of the right to respect for the private and family life of prisoners, broadly understood (including those in custody, sentenced to a certain term of imprisonment, and those sentenced to life imprisonment): 1) the conclusion that the restriction of the right to respect for private and family life for persons deprived of liberty, provided it is lawful, is not incompatible with the Convention; 2) the conditions/criteria for the legality of such restriction, implemented by national authorities; 3) the systematic identification of the main types of violations of the right to respect for family life recorded in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding convicted persons and persons in custody; 4) special protection of correspondence between an inmate and their lawyer; 5) differentiation of the spheres of application of Article 8 with other articles of the Convention, primarily Article 3; 6) determination of the main trend in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights «in the penitentiary sphere and in the criminal justice system as a whole,» which consists of constantly raising the standards of human rights by the Court; 7) ignoring the need for an individual approach in applying restrictions on the rights of persons deprived of liberty. The analysis of the existing body of scientific literature shows that existing studies are mainly based on the analysis of the European Court of Human Rights practice regarding foreign states and, with one exception, do not distinguish the legal status of those sentenced to life imprisonment among other deprived individuals. Since the publication of the analyzed monographs, 9–10 years have passed. During this time, the European Court of Human Rights has developed a significant body of practice regarding Ukraine, taking into account the Ukrainian context. Therefore, the analysis of the European Court of Human Rights decisions specifically regarding Ukraine should be a priority. Additionally, they should be analyzed in full. Such an analysis will allow, in conjunction with demonstrating the Convention’s standards regarding the right of those sentenced to life imprisonment to respect for their private and family life, to show the systematic and partial problems in this area identified by the European Court of Human Rights in its practice regarding Ukraine.

The research paper examines the legal category of procedural (proceedings) law “Right to a Fair Trial” as a fundamental element of the European Human Rights Convention and the judicial practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The Authors concentrate mainly on the general part of Article 6 and focus on crucial aspects of the mentioned right which have become significant for the daily legal practice in the Russian Federation, Republic of Austria and other member states. In the domestic Russian legal doctrine, there are sectoral and international legal studies devoted to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the functioning of the European Court of Human Rights and the legal nature of its acts (A. Abashidze, E. Alisevich, M. Biryukov, S. Kalashnikova,V. Tumanov, K. Aristova).Along with this, from the standpoint of conventional rights, Russian legal scholars studied the procedural features of the implementation of acts of the European Court of Human Rights and the application of conventional norms in civil, arbitration and criminal cases (I. Vorontsova, T. Solovieva, M. Glazkova, S. Afanasiev, L. Volosatova, E. Iodkovsky, K. Mashkova, etc.).The private-scientific research methods used by the Authors in the presented scientific article, predominantly comparative, require the study of the works of foreign scholars in the field of law, which include P. Leanza, O. Pridal, D. Spielmann, V. M. Zupancic, H. Mosler, A. Buyse. Despite the rather large volume of doctrinal sources on the nature and implementation of conventional rights, the issues of applying the right to a fair trial in administrative disputes and cases arising from public law relations have not become the subject of scientific research. The empirical basis of the study conducted by the Authors is composed of 66 pilot judgments and other acts of the European Court of Human Rights on complaints from individuals against Russia, Austria, France, Finland, the Netherlands, Great Britain, Switzerland and other member states of the Council of Europe; judicial acts of the courts of Russia, Austria and other European countries. It is concluded that the practice of Article 6 of the European Human Rights Convention by the European Court has had a remarkable and sometimes unprecedented impact on public law and law enforcement activities of the European countries that are parties to the Convention. As Russian and Austrian experience shows, the decision of the European Court on behalf of the enforcement of Article 6 in one specific case can induce the state not only to adopt a separate law, but also to carry out serious institutional changes. Many such examples are given below by the Authors, which testify that the decisions of the European Court are able to act as a powerful law-forming force on the national level.

The so-called Salduz doctrine that concerns the right to a fair trial and the right to the defense attorney emerged from the case of Salduz v. Turkey, decided on the part of the European Court of Human Rights where the Grand Chamber found the violation of Article 6, paragraph 3(c) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. In this connection, the aim of this paper is twofold. In the first place, the paper aims to demonstrate how the European Court of Human Rights has overturned the two main tenents of the so-called Salduz doctrine derived from its landmark case of Salduz v. Turkey in its later Judgments delivered in the case of Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom and the case of Beuze v. Belgium. The two tenets derived from the Salduz doctrine being examined in the paper are the right to access to the defense attorney as a rule during pre-trial proceedings and the absolute exclusionary rule. In the second place, the paper aims to offer a critique of the standard of compelling reasons employed in the Ibrahim Judgment. In order to achieve its aim, this paper primarily analyses the jurisprudence of the European Human Court of Human Rights in the cases of Salduz v. Turkey, Ibrahim and Others v. the United Kingdom, and Beuze v. Belgium. Besides, the paper also touches upon other judgments of the European Court of Human Rights related to its subject. The paper in question, therefore, primarily relies on the case-law method in achieving its aims. The paper concludes that in overturning the Salduz doctrine in relation to aspects examined in the paper, the European Court of Human Rights has exacerbated the legal standing of the person against whom criminal proceedings are being conducted.

It is indicated that proper protection of fundamental human rights is a key criterion for the existence of a true legal state. Coverage of the functioning of the European Court of Human Rights is becoming increasingly widespread in the information space. The significance of this institution not only does not decrease over time, but also increases. Today, the ECHR has become an effective mechanism of legal protection for those citizens who have exhausted the possibilities of achieving justice within the national legal system. The article examines the impact of the ECtHR decisions on the protection of human rights through the prism of modern challenges and threats. It is noted that the imperfection of the national judicial system is an obvious fact. At the same time, Ukraine is among the five countries with the largest number of applications to the European Court of Human Rights. It is emphasized that the fact that more and more people are applying to the European Court of Human Rights indicates that it is an effective mechanism for protecting their rights and freedoms. However, the ECtHR is a supranational mechanism for the protection of human rights: its capabilities are limited by its powers, the breadth of which is determined taking into account respect for the sovereignty of the member states that have voluntarily undertaken to implement the decisions of the Court to which they are parties. The effectiveness of the legal protection mechanism established by the European Convention on Human Rights depends not only on the efficiency of the Court’s work, but also on how conscientiously states implement its decisions. And only the combination of these two factors has the effect of ensuring human rights and fundamental freedoms stipulated by the Convention. It is concluded that in the context of adapting Ukrainian legislation to EU legislation, ensuring social human rights (the right to a decent standard of living and social development), political rights (compliance with international electoral standards, the right to association), and protecting human rights are the key to stable partnership relations with EU member states. Ukraine needs to continue to make considerable efforts to ensure the effectiveness of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, to create new effective national remedies for its violations, and to adapt national legislation to European standards. That is, the most effective and direct protection of human rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention should be ensured at the national level.

The article focuses on the role of legal acts of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the criminal process of Ukraine. It analyses national and international regulatory and legal acts as well as highlights the standpoints of scholars, which resulted in defining the need to use the term “the practice of the European Court of Human Rights” aiming to describe the legal acts of the ECHR as a source of Ukrainian criminal procedural law. The article gives ground to the statement that the court order issued by the ECHR which reveals the fact of Ukraine violating international obligations (norms of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) in court’s resolution of a case, that have entered into force, have a dualistic legal nature: on the one hand, it is a legal act, which provides grounds for reviewing the criminal case in exceptional circumstances, and on the other hand, is a part of the practice of the ECHR. The author makes a conclusion that the role of the practice of the ECHR in the Ukrainian criminal process is to ensure the rule of law and lawfulness in the criminal procedure by means of applying the practice of the ECHR as a source of law. The role of court orders issued by the ECHR, which establish the fact of Ukraine violating international obligations (norms of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) in court’s resolution of a case that have entered into force, is viewed in initiating a mechanism to ensure proper and effective protection of human rights and freedoms in the criminal case.

The author has studied the issue of the origin and formation of the European Court of Human Rights after the Second World War, steps in the establishment and development of this Court, as well as the actions of the Member States to consolidate the development of the European Court of Human Rights at specialized conferences with the support of the Committee of Ministers. The list of regulatory and legislative acts adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine for the establishment of the rule of law in regard to the understanding of human rights in the activities of Ukrainian courts has been researched. Since the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms has become part of national legislation after its ratification by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, more detailed study should be conducted regarding the urgent task of fully understanding the content of this international treaty and the main mechanisms for implementing its norms. The author has analyzed the implementation of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the example of its specific decisions into criminal procedural legislation of Ukraine by applying the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights by the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court in its activities and problematic aspects of their practical implementation. Particular attention has been paid to the study of problematic aspects of the use of these decisions in practice by highlighting the rulings of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court issued in 2019. The author has analyzed the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in regard to the conducted secret (search) actions by law enforcement agencies with further disclosure ob obtained evidence to the defense party; it has been also pointed out that the right to disclose evidence contained in criminal proceedings is not absolute to the defense and may be limited only in cases when there are the interests of national security, information protection or witness protection concerning the methods and forms of law enforcement agencies’ activity. The author has made propositions to resolve certain situations related to the implementation of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine.

The study aimed to analyse how the Ukrainian legal system implements the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as to identify problems and prospects for improving this process. The article used methods of legal analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, comparison of national legislation with the European Convention on Human Rights, analysis of the statistics of the European Court of Human Rights, research on the implementation of European Court of Human Rights decisions at the national level, hermeneutics to identify terminological gaps, analysis of the implementation of European standards in the national legal system, and deduction to identify key issues in cases against Ukraine. An analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights revealed numerous systemic human rights violations in Ukraine, particularly in the areas of conditions of detention, unlawful arrests and lengthy court proceedings. Problems with non-enforcement of court decisions and violations of the rights to liberty and dignity have been confirmed by numerous cases, such as Gongadze v. Ukraine and Kharchenko v. Ukraine. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine following the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular the limitation of the term of pre-trial detention, have reduced the number of cases of prolonged detention The study aimed to analyse how the Ukrainian legal system implements the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as to identify problems and prospects for improving this process. The article used methods of legal analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, comparison of national legislation with the European Convention on Human Rights, analysis of the statistics of the European Court of Human Rights, research on the implementation of European Court of Human Rights decisions at the national level, hermeneutics to identify terminological gaps, analysis of the implementation of European standards in the national legal system, and deduction to identify key issues in cases against Ukraine. An analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights revealed numerous systemic human rights violations in Ukraine, particularly in the areas of conditions of detention, unlawful arrests and lengthy court proceedings. Problems with non-enforcement of court decisions and violations of the rights to liberty and dignity have been confirmed by numerous cases, such as Gongadze v. Ukraine and Kharchenko v. Ukraine. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine following the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular the limitation of the term of pre-trial detention, have reduced the number of cases of prolonged detention

The article examines the issue of protection of public morality of modern Ukrainian legislation and the direction of resolving this issue in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. The urgency of the issue of moral protection is undeniable, because any offence, crime or action that harms others is an immoral phenomenon. The protection of morality, therefore, aims to prevent illegal human activities and criminal acts in the future. The decisions of the European Court of Human Rights are aimed at achieving this goal, which is dictated by humanistic tendencies and social and legal progress. However, the protection of public morality under current Ukrainian legislation does not fully meet this goal of the European Community. The relevant law of Ukraine "On Protection of Public Morality" specifies only some legal bases of protection of society from the distribution of products that may adversely affect public morality, leaving all other issues of morality aside. This leads to such negative consequences as disrespect for the elderly, careless attitude to family responsibilities, degradation of personality, etc., because it is morality that originally exists in society, defining the essence of human nature, which exists in contrast to the animal world. The article analyzes the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and finds that the issue of legal protection of public and personal morality can be divided into two areas: protection of personal morality in the moral interests of society and protection of morality recognized in society and currently valid. . An analysis of the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights has given grounds to assert that the European Community searches for justice by combining the interests of society and the needs of the individual. The Court recognizes moral and fair interference in a person's private life if such interference: meets an urgent need and a social need; meets the condition of "the need for such intervention in a democratic society"; is proportional to the legitimate aim; directly provided by law within the meaning of Art. 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The following are recognized by the European Court of Human Rights as illegal and immoral: systematic storage and use by public authorities of information about a person's private life; use of information relating to a person's distant past.

«Constitutional instrument of the European public order»: it is these now-known terms that the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter - the Court) qualified in 1995 the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter - the Convention), in a decision issued by the Grand Chamber. Should we conclude from this that the Convention will be equated with the Constitution, and the Court with the constitutional court? Judges as guarantors of rights and freedoms, constitutional courts and the European Court of Human Rights influence each other, may pronounce on identical or similar issues – especially after the entry into force of the priority question of constitutionality – and sometimes seem to use equivalent standards of reference. However, constitutional courts constantly use the Court’s case law, but never mention it. In addition, the European Court no longer hesitates within its control to appropriate the decisions of the constitutionalcourts. Thus, a significant convergence of case law is emerging, which can lead to a double reading: should we be delighted by such complementarity of controls? Or consider, on the contrary, that these relations are based primarily on competition law? The dialogue of case law corresponds to all cases when, in the absence of an institutionalized procedure, the court decides to more or less freely use provisions from such and such a decision made by others. Among legal dialogues, the dialogue between domestic constitutional judges and the European Court of Human Rights is certainly the densest and most fruitful.
 Dialogue between courts involves the implementation of institutional cooperation procedures. Although the treaty system did not provide for any institutional procedure for cooperation, the extension of the Court’s jurisdiction to issue advisory opinions is aimed at strengthening the interaction between the Court and national courts in order to consolidate the implementation of the convention in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity. Constitutional courts occupy a very limited place in ECtHR case law and vice versa. The so-called «dialogue of judges» has its advantages and, in particular, allows to avoid misunderstandings.

У статті досліджено окремі аспекти застосування практики Європейського Суду з прав людин и під час здійснення правосуддя в кримінальних провадженнях щодо корупційних злочинів. Проаналізовано сучасні думки науковців щодо застосування практики Європейського Суду з прав людини під час здійснення правосуддя в кримінальних провадженнях щодо корупційних злочинів. Досліджено авторські наукові підходи, які обґрунтовують висновок про те, що використання практики ЄСПЛ у кримінальному су-дочинстві України є обов’язковим. Визначено, що застосування практики Європейського Суду з прав людини під час здійснення правосуддя в кримінальних провадженнях щодо корупційних злочинів прямо передбачено ч. 2 ст. 8 КПК України. Також доведено, що використання практики ЄСПЛ вітчизняними судами під час здійснення правосуддя в кримінальних провадженнях щодо корупційних злочинів як мотивація виправдувальних вироків не завжди пов’язана з урахуванням практики ЄСПЛ щодо провокації вчинення злочину, а також засновується на використанні доктрини «плодів отруйного дерева» та «розумного сумніву».

Subject of the research. The article considers two levels in the mechanism of protection of human rights and freedoms: national and supranational. National includes both judicial and non-judicial methods of protection. The supranational level is represented by universal (global) and regional ways. The purpose of the research is to identify an effective mechanism for the protection of human rights that can replace the mechanism of protection provided by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, which has ceased to be valid for citizens of the Russian Federation. Research methods are the formal-legal method, analysis, synthesis, formallogical method.The main results. Theoretically, a particular citizen can use any of the national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights. However, the nature of their action and the procedure for gaining access to these mechanisms are different, which affects their effectiveness and the readiness of a person to turn to one or another method of protection. Among supranational mechanisms, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 has a unique status: on the one hand, this document is “a symbol of the moral consensus of all states, the starting point for the creation of a modern human rights regime”; on the other hand, it is an act-declaration, the application of which in specific legal relations and the protection of human rights with its help are problematic. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 12/16/1966 provides for the establishment of a Human Rights Committee that exercises control over the provisions of the Covenant through a system of reports. Reports on measures taken to implement the rights provided for by the Covenant, as well as on non-fulfillment of their obligations under the Covenant by other States Parties, are submitted by States Parties. The mechanism of reports, however, is not reliable enough - there are states that ignore it.Regional Conventions are rightly considered the most effective means of protecting human rights. The implementation of the provisions of the Conventions is ensured by the activities of supranational judicial bodies, to which the applicant can file a complaint. The conditions for applying to such a court, its territorial proximity, the possibility of executing court decisions make this method of protection as accessible as possible. Among the national remedies, first of all, it should be noted the activity of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to protect the constitutional rights of citizens. The provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the section on human rights are almost identical, often written in the same phrases. But, despite the number of coincidences in the designation of human rights and freedoms, the main thing is not the designation (this is a declaration) of a specific right or freedom, but how they are applied and what is the practice of their protection (interpretation) by the Constitutional Court at the national level and the Convention on the supranational. It is here that the understanding of “identical” formulations can differ, and the question of who is better: a national or supranational body protects a particular human right, becomes debatable. It should also be remembered about the very meaning of supranational protection as an opportunity to receive protection from one's own state, albeit a subsidiary one. Therefore, it would be wrong to assume that in the absence of the possibility of applying to the ECHR, a citizen will be able to receive protection in the Constitutional Court without prejudice to the outcome of such protection.Considering that the protection of human rights is, first of all, the activity of national courts of first instance, consideration by the courts of administrative, civil and criminal cases, in cases where it is carried out in full compliance with the norms of procedural legislation, is able to fully ensure the protection of the rights and human freedoms. To do this, the courts have all the necessary tools, you just need the ability and desire to use them.Among the internal structures for monitoring the observance of human rights, a number of state and public bodies can be distinguished - the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, the police, the prosecutor's office and others. However, it is not possible to attribute them to the effective bodies for the protection of human rights.Conclusions. The existing national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights, in their effectiveness, are not able to fully compensate for the loss of the opportunity for citizens of the Russian Federation to file a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights.

The article is devoted to the disclosure of the concept of «fair balance» in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. There are analyzed the latter’s decision concerning the application of Article 1 of the First Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms regarding the observance by the respondent state of a fair balance between the society interests and the protection of the individual’s private interests. In the article on the basis of the analysis of the European Court of Human Rights practice in the subject there is concluded that the violation of the aforesaid fair balance takes place mainly in the absence of adequate compensation for the damage caused by the restriction of ownership.

The article is devoted to determining the peculiarities of application of various types of measures in the mechanism of execution of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine.Based on the analysis of international legal acts, provisions of Ukrainian legislation and case law, the author describes the procedure for applying individual measures and general measures in the process of enforcement of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Ukraine. The author distinguishes the difference between the procedure for enforcement of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the procedure for enforcement of judgments of foreign courts or international commercial arbitrations in Ukraine.It is argued that the viewpoint in the scientific literature that judicial review is not the main means of individual influence in the mechanism of enforcement of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights does not in any way negate its importance in situations where restitutio in integrum is possible only in this way.The author concludes that measures to enforce a judgment of the European Court of Human Rights are comprehensive in nature and are aimed at the fullest possible restoration of the violated right, elimination of the negative consequences of such a violation and prevention of similar violations in the future.The . The author concludes that individual measures are best suited to a particular legal situation. They are implemented both by virtue of the direct effect of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on the territory of Ukraine (in terms of payment of compensation to the victim) and by adopting decisions of state authorities based on the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in accordance with the established procedure. For example, by reviewing decisions of national courts in exceptional circumstances.The author concludes that general measures have a systemic impact on the legal system of the State, serve the purpose of bringing national legislation closer to European standards and have a preventive effect on preventing future violations of the rights protected by the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights, not only in respect of the person in whose favour the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights was delivered, but also in respect of any other citizens of the relevant State.

The principle of non-refoulement provided for by Article 33 of the Geneva Convention constitutes a principle of international law with a significant role in the protection of human rights. This principle has been confirmed by the European Court of Human Rights, which has affirmed the state's responsibility for returning an asylum-seeker to a country where he risks being subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment or torture, in breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Considering this reasoning, in the case of Hirsi Jamaa and others v. Italy, the European Court of Human Rights found the Italian State responsible for violating Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 for the collective refoulement of migrants without a procedure for assessing their individual situation in a state where they could face inhuman and degrading treatment, as well as for violating Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as the applicants had been denied the opportunity to appeal before the expulsion measure was carried out. Recently, the European Court of Human Rights' orientation has changed since, in the case of N.D. and N.T. v. Spain, the Court excluded the violation of both Article 4 of the 4th Protocol and Article 13 of the European Convention on Human Rights, stating that the collective rejections were due to the “applicants' own conduct”. This decision entails many perplexities regarding the protection of human rights.
 
 Received: 24 January 2022 / Accepted: 19 March 2022 / Published: 5 May 2022