欧洲人权公约》第 4 条下的人口贩运和强迫卖淫问题

Veljko Turanjanin, Jelena Stanisavljević
{"title":"欧洲人权公约》第 4 条下的人口贩运和强迫卖淫问题","authors":"Veljko Turanjanin, Jelena Stanisavljević","doi":"10.1017/glj.2023.98","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n We discuss the issue of bringing human trafficking and forced prostitution within the purview of Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia marked a turning point by classifying forced prostitution through human trafficking under Article 4. However, in the judgment in S.M. v. Croatia, the ECtHR further reinforced its view that human trafficking and forced prostitution constitute a violation of Article 4.\n We explain human trafficking and forced prostitution both theoretically and through a number of international legal acts. We then explain Article 4 of the Convention and provide a comprehensive analysis of the material and procedural guarantees against human trafficking and forced prostitution. We also comment on the positive obligations that the ECtHR set for Member States. The authors believe that, despite numerous criticisms, the ECtHR’s position is correct and that both human trafficking and forced prostitution violate the principles of democratic society. Therefore, victims must enjoy the protection afforded by Article 4 of the Human Rights Convention and other conventions if their life situation falls within their scope.","PeriodicalId":503760,"journal":{"name":"German Law Journal","volume":"11 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human trafficking and forced prostitution under article 4 of the European convention on human rights\",\"authors\":\"Veljko Turanjanin, Jelena Stanisavljević\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/glj.2023.98\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n We discuss the issue of bringing human trafficking and forced prostitution within the purview of Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia marked a turning point by classifying forced prostitution through human trafficking under Article 4. However, in the judgment in S.M. v. Croatia, the ECtHR further reinforced its view that human trafficking and forced prostitution constitute a violation of Article 4.\\n We explain human trafficking and forced prostitution both theoretically and through a number of international legal acts. We then explain Article 4 of the Convention and provide a comprehensive analysis of the material and procedural guarantees against human trafficking and forced prostitution. We also comment on the positive obligations that the ECtHR set for Member States. The authors believe that, despite numerous criticisms, the ECtHR’s position is correct and that both human trafficking and forced prostitution violate the principles of democratic society. Therefore, victims must enjoy the protection afforded by Article 4 of the Human Rights Convention and other conventions if their life situation falls within their scope.\",\"PeriodicalId\":503760,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"German Law Journal\",\"volume\":\"11 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"German Law Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2023.98\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"German Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2023.98","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们讨论了将贩运人口和强迫卖淫纳入《欧洲人权公约》第 4 条管辖范围的问题。欧洲人权法院在 "Rantsev 诉塞浦路斯和俄罗斯 "一案中的判决标志着一个转折点,它将通过贩运人口强迫卖淫归入第 4 条的范畴。然而,在 S.M.诉克罗地亚一案的判决中,欧洲人权法院进一步强化了其观点,即人口贩运和强迫卖淫构成对第 4 条的违反。我们从理论上并通过一些国际法律文书来解释贩卖人口和强迫卖淫。然后,我们解释了《公约》第 4 条,并全面分析了打击人口贩运和强迫卖淫的物质和程序保障。我们还评论了欧洲人权法院为成员国规定的积极义务。作者认为,尽管受到许多批评,欧洲人权法院的立场是正确的,人口贩运和强迫卖淫都违反了民主社会的原则。因此,如果受害者的生活状况属于《人权公约》第 4 条和其他公约规定的保护范围,他们必须享有这些公约规定的保护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Human trafficking and forced prostitution under article 4 of the European convention on human rights
We discuss the issue of bringing human trafficking and forced prostitution within the purview of Article 4 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Rantsev v. Cyprus and Russia marked a turning point by classifying forced prostitution through human trafficking under Article 4. However, in the judgment in S.M. v. Croatia, the ECtHR further reinforced its view that human trafficking and forced prostitution constitute a violation of Article 4. We explain human trafficking and forced prostitution both theoretically and through a number of international legal acts. We then explain Article 4 of the Convention and provide a comprehensive analysis of the material and procedural guarantees against human trafficking and forced prostitution. We also comment on the positive obligations that the ECtHR set for Member States. The authors believe that, despite numerous criticisms, the ECtHR’s position is correct and that both human trafficking and forced prostitution violate the principles of democratic society. Therefore, victims must enjoy the protection afforded by Article 4 of the Human Rights Convention and other conventions if their life situation falls within their scope.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Odious Debt Doctrine: The Equitable Rule Crime and Sanctions: Beyond Sanctions as a Foreign Policy Tool – ERRATUM Trust and the Procedural Requirements of Article 7(2) TEU: When More than One Bad Apple Spoils the Barrel Trust and the Exchange of EU Classified Information: The Example of Absolute Originator Control Impeding Joint Parliamentary Scrutiny at Europol Balancing Interests: Criminal Proceedings & Private Life Interference Under Martial Law in Ukraine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1