رژیم حقوق بشر در اتحادیۀ اروپایی؛ عدم شمولیت و یکپارچگی

The article analyses the mechanism of the establishment and maintenance of liberal democracy in Lithuania. This is a political and legal process where politicians have to obey the requirements of constitutionalism consciously. The research considers the periodization of the evolution of the legal system in the Republic of Lithuania: from this approach three periods of the development of the relationship between constitutional law and politics are distinguished: (1) the period of priority of politics over constitutional law; (2) the period of the priority of constitutional law over politics and (3) the period of the maintenance of constitutional law as the methodological basis of political-legal thinking in the political life of the state, the period of the maintenance of constitutional law as the methodological basis of political-legal thinking in the political life of the state (since 2004), period coincides with the entry of the Republic of Lithuania to the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The legislation that does not meet the requirements of constitutionalism can be reported not only to the Constitutional Court, but also to the European Court of Human Rights and the European Court of Justice. This period reflects the tendency that the state’s politicians seek to obey the values and norms of the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania deliberately. It was concluded that the principle of legal continuity is observed regarding the institutional formation of the legal system of Lithuania.

In the study, the content and the normative-legal foundations of the principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms are comprehensively analysed on the basis of the diversity of views existing in legal doctrine, international instruments, and judicial practice. In the first part of the study, the relevance of the topic and its main directions are identified. It is noted that the normative-legal foundations of the principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms are characterised by a broader scope and a higher degree of systematic coherence compared to other principles of international law. The second part of the study analyses the principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the key areas of activity of international organisations; finally, a number of significant aspects are highlighted by distinguishing between international organisations operating in this field. The third part examines the international legal foundations of the principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, as well as the essential characteristics of international treaties as the normative basis of this principle. In this regard, reference to specific international treaties makes it possible to arrive at well-founded conclusions. In the fourth part, a number of important conclusions are drawn regarding the content and normative foundations of the principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. One of the key conclusions is that the fundamental provisions of this principle are incorporated into the domestic legislation of States regardless of their participation in international treaties in this field. In this context, the primary purpose of the State to ensure human rights, the direct applicability of human rights, the determination of human rights standards on the basis of international treaties, and similar elements may be regarded as essential. The content of the principle of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms has been further enriched and developed in a new dimension through the specific principles formed in the field of human rights (humanism, justice, the principle most favourable to the individual, development, etc.). Keywords: human rights, international organisations, international treaties, human rights standards, principles of international law, normative-legal foundations, international obligations, international legal custom, international judicial practice, general principles of law.

This article will analyse some of the most significant developments in the human rights case-law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Court of First Instance (CFI) in recent years. It will begin with a brief description of how the ECJ has finally started relying on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU) in its judgments. The second part of this article will deal with the decision of the ECJ that the highly controversial European Arrest Warrant (EAW) does not breach the principles of legality and equality. Finally, the third part will focus on the litigation arising from the adoption of counter-terrorism measures — in particular, economic sanctions against individuals. The specific cases that this article will deal with in Sections 2 and 3 have arisen from the European Union’s measures against crime and terrorism, and have been chosen to be the focus of this article because of the highly sensitive nature and the complex institutional framework of this area of activity of the Union, the most rapidly changing one at present.

Human rights condition the relations between the individual and the State, delimiting the power of the latter, and simultaneously obliging the State to take the appropriate measures that will make it possible for any person to enjoy and exercise his or her human rights freely. In the last two hundred and fifty years or so, history has witnessed the struggle and continued efforts to translate that into a tangible deed. Since the French and American Revolutions, which took place in the late eighteenth century, the human rights cause has led to several democratic revolutionary movements seeking to achieve individual liberation and establish control over the institutions of power, especially governments. Thus, governments and other power structures are duly obliged to respect, protect, guarantee and implement human rights as a sum of personal and collective rights defined in State Constitutions and other domestic and international laws comprising the reliable foundations for legal entitlements and remedies in case of non-fulfilment. Accordingly, our article focuses mainly on a detailed analysis of the relations between governments and human rights in democratic societies, stressing that guaranteeing them clears the necessary ground for the existence and functioning of the rule of law. More specifically, it aims to provide adequate answers to the following questions: (1) May governments restrict human rights, and what are the relevant clauses? (2) What does the term “derogation” mean in a state of emergency? (3) What are the reservations concerning the international or regional human rights treaties? (4) What do measures against terrorism represent within the framework of human rights? Keywords: human rights, State, power, government, restriction.

In 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered several highly important judgments and opinions in the field of human rights law. The present article aims to provide an overview of this jurisprudence. It considers the most important cases in the fields of asylum law, the right to hold a European Citizens ‘ Initiative, data protection, non-discrimination, and the rule of law. Following a summary of each case discussed, it analyses the relevant aspects concerning human rights protection. The article finally concludes that the case law of the CJEU in the field of human rights law remains ambivalent. While some cases show further improvement in protecting the individual, other cases still show a strong tendency of relying on a utilitarian approach to human rights. THE RIGHT TO ASYLUM The Right to Asylum under Article 18 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR) is of immense practical importance as the Common European Asylum System (CEAS) is still struggling with the consequences of the refugee crisis of 2015. The jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in 2017 on the matter has also clarified issues that are of general importance for EU human rights law and doctrine. THE REFUGEE STATUS Many systems of human rights protection have a general concept that individuals responsible for acts of persecution and violations of human rights should not benefit from fundamental rights and freedoms themselves. Enemies of freedom should not benefit from fundamental rights while they are trying to subvert them. At the very least, the rights of the enemies of human rights can be restricted more severely than those of other beneficiaries. Thus, Article 17 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) contains a prohibition of abuse of rights, which makes it clear that the ECHR may not be interpreted as allowing any act aimed at the destruction of the rights guaranteed in the Convention. In the same vein, Article 1 section F of the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (CSR51) states that the provisions of the Convention shall not apply to any person who is guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations (UN). The CFR, however, does not contain a similar clause.

While the original basic treaties establishing the European Communities were more or less silent on the need to respect human rights or fundamental rights, the Court of Justice of the European Communities (now the European Court of Justice) gradually came to the understanding that the principle of primacy of Community law could not in the long run be imposed against national constitutional bills of rights unless Community law itself provided some guarantees for the protection of fundamental rights. Today, fundamental rights have become part and parcel of the day-to-day work of the Court and there are even people who seem to think that the Court takes fundamental rights all too seriously. Recapitulating the general development of fundamental rights in EU law and the EU’s accession to the European Convention on Human Rights, as well as comparing Luxembourg’s and the European Court of Human Rights’ case law and legal regimes, this article argues that the European Court of Justice is not a human rights court. It is but a judicial body charged with the task of ensuring that the law—which includes a vast and heterogeneous set of rules adopted and applied within a constitutional order which is quite different from the ECHR system—is observed, as required by Article 19(1) TEU.

This chapter discusses Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR) which corresponds to Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). It highlights the significance of freedom of expression and information. The theoretical foundations underpinning the freedom of expression have been subject to considerable doctrinal debate, but neither debate was able to receive express endorsement by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The provision of Article 11 CFR primarily covers all forms of speech conveyed by any means of communication. Thus, the ECJ believes that the internet holds particular importance to freedom of expression and information.

'Right to an Effective Remedy': Judicial Protection and European Citizenship

The article examines the essence and nature of terrorism in the light of the problem of observance and protection of human rights, as well as analyzes the problems that arise in the implementation of anti-terrorist activities. Emphasis is placed on the fact that it is difficult to find a balance in the observance of human rights in the implementation of various anti-terrorist measures by law enforcement agencies and the investigation of crimes related to terrorist activities. It is concluded that the fight against terrorism and the protection of human rights are goals that cannot conflict with each other in a democratic society. They complement and mutually reinforce each other, so when taking measures to stop terrorist activities, states are obliged to adhere to key principles and norms of international law, as well as specific commitments made in connection with participation in international human rights agreements.

This Thesis deals with the role of the Constitution and the Domestic Law in the implementation of the modern international standards of human rights as defined under the United Nations Covenants on Human Rights of 1966. It seeks to explain some aspects of the obligation of states parties to take legislative measures for purposes of the effective implementation of the Covenants at the domestic level. The study is conducted in the context of a case study of Jordan as a state party. The Thesis consists of three main parts, divided into seven Chapters and followed by Chapter VIII which is a general conclusion. Part One, contains two Chapters dealing with the relationship between the modern international standards of human rights and the domestic legal systems. Chapter I is a brief legal and historical background. It seeks to highlight some of the major developments in the legal background of the modern international standards of human rights and the legal system of Jordan. Chapter II discusses the applicability of the international rules of human rights within the domestic legal systems with special reference to Jordan. Part Two, is devoted to the first part of the role of the constitution and domestic law in the implementation of the modern international standards of human rights; namely, the adoption of equivalent standards at the domestic level. It also contains two Chapters. Whereas Chapter III focuses on the civil and political rights. Chapter IV deals with the economic, social and cultural rights. A list of four rights has been selected from each catalogue in order to define precisely what are the legislative measures required in the case of each right. Part Three, deals with the other part of the role of the constitution and domestic law, i.e. the introduction of sufficient domestic legal safeguards. It contains three Chapters. Chapter V discusses the role of the Judiciary as the vindicator of human rights, and the independence of the Judiciary as a legal safeguard against human rights violations. Chapter VI deals with the rights to judicial review of administrative actions, as a guarantee against excess or abuse of powers by the administrative authorities, and as an inevitable requirement for the rule of law and respect for human rights in practice. Chapter VII discusses emergency powers and the Impact of the state of emergency on human rights; and considers the question of derogation under Article 4 of the Political Covenant. It focuses on the role of the Constitution and the domestic legislature in imposing restrictions on the right of the national authorities to declare a public emergency and on the emergency powers themselves when the state of emergency is declared. Finally, the concluding Chapter VIII is a general assessment of; The role of the constitution and the domestic laws in the implementation of the modern international standards of human rights, the present system of international scrutiny of the domestic legislative measures, and the performance of Jordan as a state party and the existing legal system of Jordan in general.

The personal scope of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (the Charter) is an area that still needs to be defined by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The issue surrounding the personal scope entails the question of who can claim the protection of fundamental rights. A particularly controversial matter has proved to be the question whether, and if so under what circumstances, private legal entities and public authorities can invoke fundamental rights. This article aims to provide a detailed examination of the ‘landscape’ the CJEU must take into account when dealing with the personal scope of the Charter in the future. Firstly, this landscape is made up of the background and objectives of the EU and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) legal systems. Secondly, it is shaped by the personal scope application of the Charter as interpreted by the CJEU so far, and the personal scope application of the ECHR as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Finally, the application by Member State courts of fundamental rights, via the Charter, ECHR and constitutional rights, forms an element in this landscape. An examination of these aspects will provide answers to the question of how the three main players on the European fundamental rights stage – the CJEU, the ECtHR and the national courts – have applied the personal scope of their fundamental rights up to now. This also encompasses answers to the question of how these applications relate to the different background and objectives of the ECHR and the EU legal systems. These answers will provide the CJEU with tools to deliver well-informed rulings on the personal scope of Charter provisions in the future.

In the contemporary era of global scientific and technological development and the formation of a new world legal order, the concept of human ecology economics was introduced into scientific circulation, and a novel ecological and economic approach was developed in the theory of economic science. This approach enables the reduction of the risks of depletion of natural resources and environmental degradation due to unbalanced economic development. The ecological and economic approach is predicated on the widespread utilisation of an economic and legal mechanism that facilitates the reconciliation of environmental and economic interests of society with maximum respect for human rights in the formulation of economic policy. In the further development of a new branch of economic science, namely human ecology economics, it is essential to take the latest developments in the field of human rights into consideration, with particular emphasis on those pertaining to the generations of these rights. The article is dedicated to theoretical and legal approaches to understanding the generations of human rights in the era of globalization, at the crossroads of the world order and the emergence of existential challenges for modern civilisation. The new order should be formed based on the principle of respect for human rights as a fundamental value. However, contemporary economic policy and scientific and technological progress have the potential to compromise the right to human dignity, exacerbate disparities in access to fundamental resources, notably drinking water, and contribute to the infringement of other economic, social, cultural, and environmental rights. The new world order must be founded on the basis of respect for human rights and necessitates a radical transformation of the economy. The implementation of novel approaches to economic development, a component of which is the economy of human ecology, will facilitate reform. It has been demonstrated that the sustainable development model has a contribution to the development of a new type of economy. This necessitates novel approaches to environmental human rights, which, in light of scientific and technological progress, should be regarded as ecological-economic rights. The impact of economic development on human rights is analysed, and it is concluded that such development exacerbates risks, including resource depletion, violations of human rights to equality and non-discrimination, etc. Concurrently, it is emphasised that risks can be circumvented through the implementation of an ecological economy as a prerequisite for sustainable development. The text places particular emphasis on the economic aspect of environmental human rights. The ecosystemic approach to the classification of human rights is a concept that is currently being explored. It has been argued that it has significant potential; however, the rights of nature differ from human rights. These categories cannot be equated. Therefore, it is only appropriate to speak about the greening of human rights as part of the global process of greening world development. This new discourse requires a change in approach to understanding the category of "generations of human rights". Attempts to argue for the inclusion of somatic, digital and environmental rights in the fourth and fifth generations of human rights are being examined, respectively. The approach under discussion is rendered moot by the fact that it harbours risks of disrupting the established architecture of human rights. Drawing upon the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, this study underscores the emergence of digital and somatic rights as novel facets of the human right to life, the right to respect for private and family life, the right to freedom of expression, and the right to information confidentiality.

In this article, the author characterizes the importance of the missionary activity of the Church to contemporary cultures and nations, as He proclaims the Gospel and promotes fundamental development in many corners of the world. The Church, sending missionaries, teaches faith, catechism, religious practice, life in accordance with the commandments of God, gives the sacraments and takes care of Christian formation for the faithful in the particular Church. He organizes pastoral and biblical apostolate to proclaim the way of understanding modern man through the light and hope of the Gospel. The article shows that a proper understanding of the Church's missionary activity is, in essence, a realization of universal human rights. The Church recognizes the need for respect for human rights by world leaders, acknowledges the work of missionaries for the good of nations and cultures, sees a common denominator for the evangelization and development of nations that unite these problems in the observance of human rights. The provisions contained in the pacts and treatises, which guarantee the right to life and civilization development of all people, are often disregarded, therefore the Church of Christ engages its authority in the process of evangelization and all activities aimed at improving the social life of the goodwill people.

It might have been thought. at the signing of the original Treaty of Rome in 1957. that the new European Economic Community as it then was, would be an unpromi ing forum for the protection of environmental rights. The EEC Treaty. as originally drafted. contained no provisions. explicit or otherwise, regarding the environment. nor any reference to human rights. These factor . however, have not deterred the European Union (EUJ. as it has now become. from developing considerable competence in the field of environmental law’ strongly influenced by the European Court of Justice·s case law in this area. However, the translation of these competences into the language of rights has. notwithstanding the European Union·s claimed observance of human rights.’ been less transparent.

Today, the United Nations plays a leading role in the development of international law and cooperation among the world's states. Member states have pledged to realize their rights and fulfill their obligations under the UN Charter. The main objectives of the UN are envisaged in Article 1 of the Charter, where the key provision relating to human rights is reflected in paragraph 3 of Article 1. According to it, the UN aims to achieve international cooperation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural and humanitarian character and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction of race, sex, language or religion [1]. As it can be seen, the Charter only calls on states parties to promote the protection of human rights, without establishing clear obligations to protect and guarantee them. Since 2014, i.e. since Russia launched its war against Ukraine, the aggressor has not stopped committing crimes against our country and our people. Russia's actions encroach not only on the sovereignty of our state, but also on human rights and freedoms. Under such circumstances, the international community cannot stand aside from these events. Many international human rights organizations have offices in Ukraine. Among them is the UN. On 31.07.2014, the Government of Ukraine and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights signed an agreement on the deployment of a short-term UN human rights monitoring mission in Ukraine. The legal status of UN monitoring missions in legal science has not been the subject of a separate study. Certain aspects of the activities and competence of such missions have been considered in the works of such scholars as I.A. Shumilo [14], F. Megre [13], K. Boyle [12] and others, which are devoted to the coverage of international mechanisms for the protection of human rights and freedoms, the status of the UN General Assembly and the UN Human Rights Council. Therefore, the task set out in this article is to analyze and establish the specifics of the legal status of the UN Human Rights Monitoring Mission (hereinafter - the Mission), in particular, the one established for Ukraine, and the limits of the Mission's powers under the UN Charter, UN General Assembly resolutions, and international agreements between UN agencies and Ukraine. Therefore, the relevance of this article is beyond doubt. It has been established that the purpose of the Mission is to facilitate cooperation between the Government of Ukraine and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (hereinafter - OHCHR)[2] and it plays the role of a subsidiary mechanism for the protection of human rights and freedoms within the UN. The conclusions of the mission will undoubtedly serve as a convincing additional evidence base for Ukraine in international judicial and other bodies in protecting its interests and establishing the guilt of the Russian Federation for actions committed against our country.