{"title":"比例原则对刑法相关基本权利的威胁","authors":"E. Śliwiński","doi":"10.1177/20322844231158323","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article argues that the principle of proportionality—a legal tool widely used for balancing competing rights—can be perceived as a threat to criminal-law-related fundamental rights, i.e. mainly the nullum crimen sine lege and ne bis in idem principles. A case study is carried out, of A and B v Norway, Tsonyo Tsonev v Bulgaria (no 4) and Saquetti Iglesias v Spain ECtHR judgments, as well as P16-2021-001 ECtHR advisory opinion and Menci CJEU ruling, heavily relying on the rule-principle distinction (as presented by Ronald Dworkin and Robert Alexy). The conclusion stemming from the study can be described as follows: in some instances ‘inserting’ proportionality into the content of fundamental rights might be inappropriate, i.e. dogmatically flawed and detrimental to the effective protection of these rights.","PeriodicalId":448100,"journal":{"name":"New Journal of European Criminal Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Principle of proportionality as a threat to criminal-law-related fundamental rights\",\"authors\":\"E. Śliwiński\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20322844231158323\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article argues that the principle of proportionality—a legal tool widely used for balancing competing rights—can be perceived as a threat to criminal-law-related fundamental rights, i.e. mainly the nullum crimen sine lege and ne bis in idem principles. A case study is carried out, of A and B v Norway, Tsonyo Tsonev v Bulgaria (no 4) and Saquetti Iglesias v Spain ECtHR judgments, as well as P16-2021-001 ECtHR advisory opinion and Menci CJEU ruling, heavily relying on the rule-principle distinction (as presented by Ronald Dworkin and Robert Alexy). The conclusion stemming from the study can be described as follows: in some instances ‘inserting’ proportionality into the content of fundamental rights might be inappropriate, i.e. dogmatically flawed and detrimental to the effective protection of these rights.\",\"PeriodicalId\":448100,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Journal of European Criminal Law\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Journal of European Criminal Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844231158323\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Journal of European Criminal Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20322844231158323","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Principle of proportionality as a threat to criminal-law-related fundamental rights
The article argues that the principle of proportionality—a legal tool widely used for balancing competing rights—can be perceived as a threat to criminal-law-related fundamental rights, i.e. mainly the nullum crimen sine lege and ne bis in idem principles. A case study is carried out, of A and B v Norway, Tsonyo Tsonev v Bulgaria (no 4) and Saquetti Iglesias v Spain ECtHR judgments, as well as P16-2021-001 ECtHR advisory opinion and Menci CJEU ruling, heavily relying on the rule-principle distinction (as presented by Ronald Dworkin and Robert Alexy). The conclusion stemming from the study can be described as follows: in some instances ‘inserting’ proportionality into the content of fundamental rights might be inappropriate, i.e. dogmatically flawed and detrimental to the effective protection of these rights.