CCR №4(131) 2019
Values and methods: comparative analysis of the approaches of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights to the freedom of expression and the freedom of assembly

The full text of the article is available only in Russian.

Abstract

This article discusses approaches of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights to cases concerning the freedom of expression and the freedom of assembly on the example of several significant situations reviewed by both judicial bodies. The article consists of two parts. Applying the comparative-law methodology, the first part describes approaches of the Constitutional Court and the European Court to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression cases, makes conclusions regarding particular features of the methodology of both bodies regarding the said category of cases. The author concludes that when comparing approaches of the European Court of Human Rights and the Russian Constitutional Court the necessary conditions for the correct analysis are consideration of particularities of the legal position of the judicial body, limits of constitutionality (conventionality) review, and the powers of interpretation of constitutional (conventional) provisions. With regard to conclusions from the first part, the second part of the article studies substantial differences between the approaches of the Russian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights on concrete examples. The author reviews legal positions of both judicial bodies regarding freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, and concludes that both bodies are guided by the same values while considering controversial situations. Regarding the concrete examples, the author compares the methodological approaches of the Russian Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights and concludes that in the described situations each of the bodies acted within its competence and established rules of human rights norms interpretation; the difference in approaches of both judicial bodies, taking into account similar understanding of the protected values, was objectively motivated; and controversies emerged with respect to concrete circumstances and the role the latter play in adjudicating a case.

About the author:
Dmitry Kuznetsov – LL.M., Leading Counsellor, Department of International Relations and Review of the Constitutional Control Practice, Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation; Teacher, Chair of Constitutional and Administrative Law, Higher School of Economics (Saint Petersburg campus), Saint Petersburg, Russia

Citation: Kuznetsov D. (2019) Tsennosti i metody: sravnitel’no-pravovoy analiz podkhodov Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF i ESPCh k svobode samovyrazheniya i svobode sobraniy [Values and methods: comparative analysis of the approaches of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and the European Court of Human Rights to the freedom of expression and the freedom of assembly]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsion­noe obozrenie, vol.28, no.4, pp.16–34. (In Russian).

References:

Andrushchenko E.A. (2013) Kontseptsii avtonomnosti i subsidiarnosti v deyatel’nosti Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka [Concepts of auto­nomy and subsidiarity in the activities of the European Court of Human Rights]. Rossiyskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal, no.4, pp.20–25. (In Russian).

Baryshnikova Yu.R., Valiev R.G., Gubaeva T.V., Gumerov L.A. (2014) Normy prava: teoretiko-pravovoe issledovanie [Legal norms: theoretical and legal research: a monograph], T.V.Gubaeva, A.V.Krasnov (eds.), Moscow: Rossiyskaya akademiya pravosudiya. (In Russian).

Bates E., Buckley C., Harris D.J., O’Boyle M. (2014) Harris, O’Boyle & Warbrick: Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, 3rd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Belyaeva N., Bull T., Goldberger D., Hamilton M., Jarmen N., Khaydarova M.S., Ostaf S., Pogosyan V., Vashkevich A., Zhovtis E.A. (2010) Rukovodyashchie printsipy po svobode mirnykh sobraniy [Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly], 2nd ed., Warsaw: OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. Available at: https://www.osce.org/ru/odihr/83237?download=true (accessed: 22.07.2019). (In Russian).

Brems E. (ed.) (2008) Conflicts between fundamental rights, Antwerp; Oxford; Portland, OR: Intersentia.

Bushev A.Y. (2016) Subsidiarnaya rol’ Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka: predely usmotreniya i natsional’nyy suverenitet, kriteriy yavnoy ochevidnosti [Subsidiary role of the European Court of Human Rights: margin of appreciation and national sovereignty, the criterion of manifested evidence]. Prava cheloveka. Praktika Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka, no.4, pp.4–23. (In Russian).

Bushev A.Y. (2017) O subsidiarnoy roli Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka i predelakh obyazatel’nosti ego postanovleniy: na primere Posta­novleniya Konstitutsionnogo Suda RF po delu «YUKOS» [On subsidiary role of the European Court of Human Rights and margins of obligatory force of its judgments: on the example of the RF Constitutional Court Judgment in the “YUKOS” case]. Prava cheloveka. Praktika Evropeyskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka, no.9. (In Russian).

Dworkin R. (1996) Freedom’s Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Knyazev S.D., Rumak V.B. (2017) Ne perestupit’ tonkuyu gran’, kotoraya otdelyaet tolkovanie zakona ot ego popolneniya novymi pravilami [Do not overstep a thin border, which separates interpretation of law from the latter’s filling with new rules]. Zakon, no.10, pp.6–19. (In Russian).

Kommers D.P., Miller R.A. (2012) The Constitutional Jurisprudence of the Federal Republic of Germany, 3rd ed., Durham, London: Duke University Press.

Kryazhkova O., Rudt Yu. (2014) Rasstanovka mest slagaemykh v resheniyakh konstitutsionnykh sudov: pochemu summa menyaetsya? [Arrangement of terms in constitutional courts decisions: why the amount changes]. Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie, no.5, pp.120–135. (In Russian).

Kuznetsov D. (2014) Freedoms Collide: Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Religion in Russia in Comparative Perspective. Russian Law Journal, no.2, pp.75–100. (In Russian).

Kuznetsov D.A. (2016) Factory, kotorye neobkhodimo uchityvat’ pri provedenii sravnitel’no-pravovogo issledovaniya praktiki zarubezhnykh organov konstitutsionnogo kontrolya [The factors needed to be taken into account while making a comparative research of foreign constitutional control practice]. Zhurnal constitutsionnogo pravosudiya, no.3, pp.14–23. (In Russian).

Kuznetsov D., Taribo E. (2015) Approaches of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation towards freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. Constitutional Review, no.2, pp.23–48. (In Russian).

Letsas G. (2013) The ECHR as a living instrument: Its meaning and legitimacy. In: Føllesdal A., Peters B., Ulfstein G. (eds.) Constituting Europe: the European Court of Human Rights in a National, European and Global Context (Studies on Human Rights Conventions), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.106–141. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2021836 (accessed: 22.07.2019).

Riekkinen M.A. (2016) Pravo na mirnye sobraniya: sravnitel’no-pravovoy analiz zakonodatel’stva Rossii i Finlyandii [Freedom of assembly: comparative analysis of the Russian and Finnish legislation]. Aktual’nye problemy rossiyskogo prava, no.12, pp.32–39. (In Russian).

Salenko A.V. (2017) Svoboda mirnykh sobraniy v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: neskol’ko tezisov ob aktual’nykh problemakh [Freedom of assembly in the Russian Federation: several theses on current issues]. Zhurnal rossiy­skogo prava, no.1, pp.118–127. (In Russian).

Sergevnin S.L. (2012) K voprosu ob interpretatsionnoy deyatel’nosti Konstitutsionnogo Suda Rossiyskoy Federatsii [To the issue of interpretation activities of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation]: Paper presented at Konstitutsionnyy Kontrol: doctrina i praktika, Octover 28–29, Saint-Petersburg. Moscow: Norma. (In Russian).

Sivitskyy V.A. (2014) O nekotorykh problemakh osushchestvleniya sudebnoy zashchity prav i zakonnykh interesov v sfere publichno-pravovykh otnosheniy [On certain problems of realisation of judicial protection of rights and legal interests in the field of public law relations]. Paper presented at Nauchno-prakticheskaya conferentsiya “Sudebnaya reforma 1864 goda. Realizatsiya i zashchita prav cheloveka v sovremennoy pravovoy sisteme”, June 6, Yaroslavl’. (In Russian).

Thirlway H. (2014) The Sources of International Law, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Urbina F.J. (2017) A Critic of Proportionality and Balancing, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Zor’kin V.D. (ed.) (2011) Kommentariy k Konstitutsii Rossiyskoy Federatsii (postateynyy) [Commentary to the Constitution of the Russian Federation], 2nd ed., Moscow: Norma: Infra-M. (In Russian).

Issue articles