欧洲人权法院判例法中刑罚概念的再界定

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW European Public Law Pub Date : 2020-12-01 DOI:10.54648/euro2020069
Barış Bahçeci
{"title":"欧洲人权法院判例法中刑罚概念的再界定","authors":"Barış Bahçeci","doi":"10.54648/euro2020069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the European Court of Human Rights (Court/ECtHR) began to define an autonomous concept of penalty, its case law has been developing on the basis of the Engel criteria. This study aims to reveal the implementation of these criteria by the ECtHR and its consequences under the case law. Although the definition of penalty depends on the application of these criteria, the existence of a problem of consistency among them draws attention. As a matter of fact, one of the criteria, the nature of the sanction has undertaken a function to expand the Court’s ratione materiae through an objective assessment. However, the other Engel criteria, nature of the offence and degree of severity of the sanction are open to criticism in terms of objectivity, as well as narrowing the limits of the concept of penalty and consequently restricting the Court’s ratione materiae.\nconcept of penalty, criminal offence, European Court of Human Rights, Engel criteria, nature of sanction, nature of offence","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Redefining the Concept of Penalty in the Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights\",\"authors\":\"Barış Bahçeci\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/euro2020069\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Since the European Court of Human Rights (Court/ECtHR) began to define an autonomous concept of penalty, its case law has been developing on the basis of the Engel criteria. This study aims to reveal the implementation of these criteria by the ECtHR and its consequences under the case law. Although the definition of penalty depends on the application of these criteria, the existence of a problem of consistency among them draws attention. As a matter of fact, one of the criteria, the nature of the sanction has undertaken a function to expand the Court’s ratione materiae through an objective assessment. However, the other Engel criteria, nature of the offence and degree of severity of the sanction are open to criticism in terms of objectivity, as well as narrowing the limits of the concept of penalty and consequently restricting the Court’s ratione materiae.\\nconcept of penalty, criminal offence, European Court of Human Rights, Engel criteria, nature of sanction, nature of offence\",\"PeriodicalId\":43955,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Public Law\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Public Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020069\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Public Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020069","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自从欧洲人权法院(法院/欧洲人权法院)开始界定一个自主的刑罚概念以来,其判例法一直在恩格尔标准的基础上发展。本研究旨在揭示欧洲人权法院执行这些标准的情况及其在判例法下的后果。虽然刑罚的定义取决于这些标准的适用,但它们之间存在的一致性问题引起了人们的注意。事实上,其中一项标准,即制裁的性质,通过客观的评价,承担了扩大法院的属事理由的职能。但是,其他恩格尔标准,罪行的性质和制裁的严重程度在客观性方面容易受到批评,并且缩小了惩罚概念的范围,从而限制了法院的属事理由。刑罚概念,刑事犯罪,欧洲人权法院,恩格尔标准,制裁的性质,犯罪的性质
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
Redefining the Concept of Penalty in the Case-law of the European Court of Human Rights
Since the European Court of Human Rights (Court/ECtHR) began to define an autonomous concept of penalty, its case law has been developing on the basis of the Engel criteria. This study aims to reveal the implementation of these criteria by the ECtHR and its consequences under the case law. Although the definition of penalty depends on the application of these criteria, the existence of a problem of consistency among them draws attention. As a matter of fact, one of the criteria, the nature of the sanction has undertaken a function to expand the Court’s ratione materiae through an objective assessment. However, the other Engel criteria, nature of the offence and degree of severity of the sanction are open to criticism in terms of objectivity, as well as narrowing the limits of the concept of penalty and consequently restricting the Court’s ratione materiae. concept of penalty, criminal offence, European Court of Human Rights, Engel criteria, nature of sanction, nature of offence
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
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
16.70%
发文量
9
期刊最新文献
‘Respect for Religious Feelings’: As the Italian Case Shows, Fresh Paint Can’t Fix the Crumbling Wall of Blasphemy The ‘Then’ and the ‘Now’ of Forced Relocation of Indigenous Peoples: Repercussions in International Law, Torts and Beyond Subsidiarity v. Autonomy in the EU Book Review: Federalism and Constitutional Law: The Italian Contribution to Comparative Regionalism, Erika Arban, Giuseppe Martinico & Francesco Palermo (eds). London and New York: Routledge. 2021 The Tragic Choices During the Global Health Emergency: Comparative Economic Law Reflections
×
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