Has Italy Finally Implemented its International Obligations Concerning the Punishment of Torture?

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 715-730
Author(s):  
Alessandra Gianelli
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
European Court ◽  
Great Debate ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
International Obligations

Abstract Almost 30 years after acceding to the Convention against Torture, in 2017 Italy introduced the crime of torture into its penal code. There was great debate as to whether the new provisions were in line with the country’s international obligations. The first interpretations of these rules by the highest criminal court draw heavily on international notions, in particular on the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The result is that, while the wording of the provisions remains questionable, their application tends to be consistent with (at least some) international rules.

Extradition Between European and African Countries: Overcoming the Challenges

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 288-319
Author(s):  
Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
African Countries ◽  
European Court ◽  
Real Risk ◽  
Civil Proceedings ◽  
The Right

Although EU states use the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) for the purpose of surrendering a person who is accused of committing an offence or who has been convicted of an offence, they use extradition when dealing with countries outside the EU. However, they use surrender when dealing with the International Criminal Court (ICC). Thus, extradition is one of the ways in which African and European countries (especially EU members) are cooperating in the fight against crime. Case law from courts in some African and European countries and from the European Court of Human Rights, the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture, shows that extraditions between African and European countries have been delayed or hampered by allegations of human rights violations in the requesting state. These allegations have focused on mainly two rights: the right to a fair trial and the right to freedom from torture. The European Court of Human Rights has held that the extradition of a person should not go ahead if his or her trial was or will amount to a flagrant denial of justice or where there is a real risk of being subjected to torture. Although African courts and international human rights bodies have also held that extradition should not go ahead where there is a real risk that the person will be subjected to torture or where his/her trial will be unfair, they have not adopted the ‘flagrant denial of justice’ test. The case law also shows that some people have challenged the legal basis for their extradition. This article highlights this case law and suggests ways in which some of the challenges associated with extradition could be overcome. The article demonstrates that courts in some African and European countries have considered the nature of extradition enquiries. In some countries, such as Kenya, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings. However, in the United Kingdom, courts have held that extradition enquiries are criminal proceedings of a special type. There is consensus that extradition enquiries are not civil proceedings.

Arcs of Global Justice

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Multiple Roles ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
European Court ◽  
Moral Universe ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
Peace And War

Invoking famous words by Martin Luther King Jr.–‘the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice’–this volume analyses developments respecting global justice in the decades since the end of World War II. Presented are dozens of essays by eminent scholars, each contributed in recognition of the collection’s honouree, Professor William A. Schabas. Schabas’s work has spanned many topics in international law and has placed him in multiple roles in international courts and organizations. Accordingly, this volume discusses institutions including the United Nations, the European Court of Human Rights, and the International Criminal Court, and instruments including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention Against Torture, and the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. Fits and starts in global justice are examined with regard to many phenomena: peace and war, international crimes, culture, death penalty, environmental degradation, and not least, education and scholarship.

CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS: IV. CITIZENSHIP AND HUMAN RIGHTS

2004 ◽  
Vol 53 (2) ◽  
pp. 493-501 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika Szyszczak
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
European Court ◽  
Charter Of Fundamental Rights ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Court Of First Instance

Citizenship and human rights continue to play an important role in the evolution of Community law. Both sets of principles have appeared in the case law of the European Courts and in the creation of a Constitutional document for Europe. Part II of the draft Constitution incorporates the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union. Additionally, the first report from the independent network of experts in fundamental human rights details the various international human rights obligations which the Member States are subject to, analysing Member State policy in a number of areas in the light of the international obligations.1Paradoxically, at a time when greater emphasis is being paid to the constitutional recognition of human rights there are indications of divisions between some of the Advocates General, the Court of First Instance and the European Court of Justice (the Court) on the constitutional role of fundamental rights in relation to access to justice.

Legality, Culpability and Dogmatik: A Dialogue between the ECtHR, Comparative and International Criminal Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 823-860
Author(s):  
Giulio Vanacore
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Constitutive Element

This article aims to analyse a peculiar interplay between the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), comparative and international criminal law. The discussion focuses on legality, foreseeability of the criminal nature of conduct, knowledge of a fact’s wrongfulness and mistakes of law. Starting from foreseeability as a constitutive element of legality in the ECtHR case-law, the author examines ‘knowability’ of a fact’s wrongfulness as a component of the Continental law Dogmatik category of culpability, the issue of ignorance in common law and the general interaction between the principles of legality and culpability. With regard to the International Criminal Court, there is a problematic need to establish a personal mental link between an individual’s actions and the system criminalising such action. In this context, the issue of foreseeability as applied to modes of liability has proven to be problematic. The upshot is this paper’s appeal for a truly international criminal Dogmatik.

Foreword

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane Marie Amann ◽  
Margaret M. deGuzman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
Global Justice ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
European Court ◽  
Moral Universe ◽  
Convention Against Torture ◽  
Peace And War ◽  
Martin Luther King

In this foreword, the volume's co-editors recall the claim of Martin Luther King Jr. that ‘the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice’. The foreword summarises this collection's essays by eminent scholars, each contributed in recognition of honouree William A. Schabas. The collection analyses developments respecting global justice in the decades since the end of World War II. The volume discusses institutions such as the United Nations, the European Court of Human Rights, the International Criminal Court, and instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention Against Torture, and the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. It examines fits and starts in global justice with regard to many phenomena: peace and war, international crimes, culture, death penalty, environmental degradation, and not least, education and scholarship.

Bringing RightsMoreHome: Can a Home-grown UK Bill of Rights Lessen the Influence of the European Court of Human Rights?

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 407-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Lambrecht
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Uk Supreme Court ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Mirror Principle

This article focuses on the strategy to replace the UK Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA) with a home-grown Bill of Rights to lessen the influence of the European Court of Human Rights' case law. Without attempting to disregard the national-specific elements, the discussion of these questions is very relevant for all States confronted with the influence of Strasbourg. The tension between coherence, efficiency and autonomy is overarching. The article therefore approaches the issue not only from an outsider's perspective but also, where relevant, from a comparative constitutional law perspective. Both perspectives seem to be largely absent from the current (academic) debate. Firstly, this article analyzes the current relationship between the UK Supreme Court and the Strasbourg Court, which reveals that the judicial arguments in support of a mirror principle are not so much based on section 2(1) HRA, as they are, in the domestic courts' relationship with Strasbourg, on concerns about international obligations, hierarchy, effectiveness of the Strasbourg Court, coherence and efficiency. Internally, judicial arguments are founded on concerns about separation of powers, limited jurisdiction, and accustomedness to the precedent system. In the second part, this article focuses on the potential impact of a home-grown Bill of Rights on the current relationship between both courts; concluding that a home-grown Bill of Rights will most likely cause domestic courts to receive less latitude by Strasbourg and will not absolve domestic judges from the duty of taking into account the Strasbourg case law.

The right to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuliya Samovich
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Educational Organizations ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

The manual is devoted to making individual complaints to the European Court of human rights: peculiarities of realization of the right to appeal, conditions of admissibility and the judicial procedure of the European Court of Human Rights. The author analyses some “autonomous concepts” used in the court's case law and touches upon the possibility of limiting the right to judicial protection. The article deals with the formation and development of the individual's rights to international judicial protection, as well as the protection of human rights in universal quasi-judicial international bodies and regional judicial institutions of the European Union and the Organization of American States. This publication includes a material containing an analysis of recent changes in the legal regulation of the Institute of individual complaints. The manual is recommended for students of educational organizations of higher education, studying in the areas of bachelor's and master's degree “Jurisprudence”.

Standardy należytego uzasadnienia w świetle orzecznictwa Trybunału Konstytucyjnego i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka

2014 ◽  
pp. 33-48
Author(s):  
Przemysław Florjanowicz-Błachut
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
European Convention ◽  
European Court ◽  
Judicial Reasoning ◽  
The Right

The core function of the judiciary is the administration of justice through delivering judgments and other decisions. The crucial role for its acceptance and legitimization by not only lawyers, but also individulas (parties) and the hole society plays judicial reasoning. It should reflect on judge’s independence within the exercise of his office and show also judicial self-restraint or activism. The axiology and the standards of proper judicial reasoning are anchored both in constitutional and supranational law and case-law. Polish Constitutional Tribunal derives a duty to give reasoning from the right to a fair trial – right to be heard and bring own submissions before the court (Article 45 § 1 of the Constitution), the right to appeal against judgments and decisions made at first stage (Article 78), the rule of two stages of the court proceedings (Article 176) and rule of law clause (Article 2), that comprises inter alia right to due process of law and the rule of legitimate expactation / the protection of trust (Vertrauensschutz). European Court of Human Rights derives this duty to give reasons from the guarantees of the right to a fair trial enshrined in Article 6 § 1 of European Convention of Human Rights. In its case-law the ECtHR, taking into account the margin of appreciation concept, formulated a number of positive and negative requirements, that should be met in case of proper reasoning. The obligation for courts to give sufficient reasons for their decisions is also anchored in European Union law. European Court of Justice derives this duty from the right to fair trial enshrined in Articles 6 and 13 of the ECHR and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. Standards of the courts reasoning developed by Polish constitutional court an the European courts (ECJ and ECtHR) are in fact convergent and coherent. National judges should take them into consideration in every case, to legitimize its outcome and enhance justice delivery.

Rola uzasadnienia sądowego w realizacji prawa do rzetelnego procesu sądowoadministracyjnego– standard strasburski

2014 ◽  
pp. 13-31
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Grzelak-Bach
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Basic Level

Following a brief introduction of article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the author begins by analyzing case law from the European Court of Human Rights regarding the legal reasoning in judicial proceedings. The main premise of this paper is to present a formula for preparing legal reasoning in administrative court proceedings. The author draws attention to the role of judges who, in the process of adjudication, should apply creative interpretation of the rules of law, when they see errors or omissions in legislative provisions, or blatant violations of the European legal order. The conclusion of those deliberations finds, that the process of tailoring the approach to meet Strasbourg’s requirements should, on a basic level, be at the discretion of judges rather than the legislators.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document