This article provides an overview of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights on issues of legal aid provided by appointed advocates to people charged with criminal offence. The focus of the article are the ECtHR judgments in cases against Russia and, in particular, recent judgment in case Vasenin v. Russia. The analysis of mentioned judgments intends to identify the ECtHR requirements to the quality of legal aid on criminal cases. Qualityof legal aid is an issue which is relatively rarely examined by the ECtHR. In judgments, including those delivered on applications against Russia, the Court more often elaborates upon the same opportunity to enjoy right to legal aid, or upon conditions of defense, such as confidential communication between accused and appointed lawyer or facilities and time necessary for appointed advocate to study the case-file.
The article discusses the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on the Frumkin v. Russia case in the context of freedom of peaceful assembly and on possible limits which could be imposed by authorities on the actual exercise of this right. The author examines details of the circumstances underlying the case – from submission of a notice for a public demonstration and meeting on Bolotnaya Square in Moscow in May 2012, improper police actions which led to the conflict and dispersal of meeting, and finally applicant’s arrest. In the Court’s decision, the references were made to some earlier Court’s judgments on the similar cases (e. g. Barankevich v. Russia and Djavit An v. Turkey). The author considers the Court’s arguments on definition of peaceful assembly and the police actions to limit the agreed space of the rally as well as readiness of the authorities to negotiate with the organisers.
The case originated in an application (no. 926/08) against the Russian Federation lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Russian national, Mr Mikhail Yuryevich Karelin (“the applicant”), on 19 November 2007.The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights. On 2 July 2012 the applicant raised a further complaint concerning new unrelated domestic proceedings in 2012 and the absence of a prosecuting party in these proceedings. On 29 January 2014 the complaint concerning the absence of a prosecuting party in the court proceedings in 2012 was communicated to the Government and the remainder of the application, including the initial complaints raised in November 2007, was declared inadmissible.
The article concerns the notions of “national neutrality” and “international mindedness” of arbitrators in international commercial arbitration. The following issues are being under research in the article: what influence a nationality of an arbitrator has on a party’s choice of an arbitrator in international commercial arbitration; what are the contemporary rules on national neutrality of arbitrators. The issue of the nationality of arbitrators in international commercial arbitration is commonly discussed through the angle and in terms of independence and impartiality of arbitrators. Already back in the 80’s one of the renowned authorities in the field of international commercial arbitration and an experienced arbitrator himself, professor P. Lalive submitted that an arbitrator in international commercial arbitration must have a truly “international way of thinking” or “international mindedness”.
This article analyzes the experience of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in terms of its value as a historical source. The Tribunal considered the case against those responsible for the organization of the 1994 genocide of Tutsis in Rwanda by Government’s army and the Hutu militia. On the basis of the huge collected evidence, the Tribunal have established the fact of the genocide and contributed to understanding of what happened. Without the ICTR some of this information would not have been made available. Collected wealth of information is relevant for the history of Rwanda. The author defines the main differences between the judicial and historical approach to fact-finding.
The European Convention on Human Rights includes almost all rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – with the important exception of the right to asylum. It is therefore not surprising that the European Court of Human Rights has over the years become the most important judicial body adjudicating the destiny of refugees. It has always recognized refugees’ human rights problems, and been aware of the difficulties which parties to the Convention face now. Based on Article 2 (right to life), Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman treatment and torture) and Article 8 (right to family life) it has stopped many extraditions and expulsions. Despite the Court’s efforts, the international protection system of refugees – even in Europe – is far from perfect.
Under Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Contracting States are under an obligation to secure the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention to everyone within their jurisdiction. In broad terms, this means that the State has the duty to refrain from interfering with the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms guaranteed under the Convention (negative obligation), but also to take appropriate steps to ensure respect for those rights and freedoms within its territory (positive obligation).
The present paper analyses the practice of the disability rights advocacy in the framework of the two different systems of international human rights protection: in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights and in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with disabilities. The article examines the advantages and disadvantages of these two international systems in the light of effectiveness of disability rights protection and the implementation of international obligations of the member states. European Convention on Human Rights doesn’t contain any provisions for the special needs of disabled people or state obligations to secure disability rights, but instead the European Court’s judgments are legally binding for the member states. United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities provides for obligations of member states on securing rights of the most vulnerable persons with disabilities, but the concluding observations of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities are just advisory which reduces their impact on the situation of disabled people rights within national legal systems.
Dar’ya Boklan, Olga Boklan, Anait Smbatyan
The article deals with the problem of reference of the parties of the dispute considered by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) to the Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts (ILC Articles) adopted by the International Law Commission in 2001 (ILC) in the process of dispute resolution. Such issues as the legal status of ILC Articles, the definition of international responsibility and internationally wrongful act as the ground of international responsibility are examined. The authors make a conclusion that customary rules regarding responsibility of the states for internationally wrongful acts are codified in ILC Articles. At the same time, ILC Articles contain several norms which constitute a progressive development and only in future can become the legally binding provision.
The article summarizes some results of the activity of the Court of the Eurasian economic union in the four years of its existence. The author cites statistics on the total number of cases and their nature; classifies the sources used by the Court; analyzes the position of the Court on the issue of determining the place of “external” treaties in Union law; determines the particularity of the Court’s use of the jurisprudence of other international courts and the jurisprudence of domestic courts; shows how the Court addresses the domestic legislation; discloses the specifics of interpretative and investigative activities of the Court. He also formulates certain procedural and substantive legal problems facing the Court, and shows through specific examples the Court’s approaches to solving these problems.
A Commentary to the European Convention on Human Rights, written by renowned international law scholar William Schabas, provides a detailed legal analysis of all the articles of the ECHR as well as substantive provisions of the Protocols to the Convention. A Commentary is singled out by the authors scrutiny on the history of the adoption of the Convention’s provisions, their evolutive interpretation in the case law of the ECtHR, as well as analysis of the Convention in the context of other provisions of international law. The commentary will be of interest for legal practitioners, as well as a wider audience of those interested in international human rights law. The treatise is of special value for all the students and researchers of the European Convention.
Most people fulfill their vital needs only through the work, therefore equal access of citizens to work, parity approach to wages and salaries are considered to be the main facets of the social policies of all civilized nations that guarantee the free development of citizens. However, we often meet various forms of employment discrimination, which is based on race, gender, religion, national origin, age, and physical or mental disability. Discrimination can be intended, involving disparate treatment of a group or individual, or unintended, but still making disparate impact on them. However, the prohibition of discrimination enshrined in employment in international law, as well as at the level of the national legal system does not provide full protection of Russian citizens from this phenomenon.