对《公约》保障的人权的任意司法干预

Q2 Social Sciences Global Journal of Comparative Law Pub Date : 2021-06-25 DOI:10.1163/2211906x-10010014
S. A. Slipchenko, Oleh Syniehubov, Aleksandr R. Shyshka, Vikoriia V. Valakh
{"title":"对《公约》保障的人权的任意司法干预","authors":"S. A. Slipchenko, Oleh Syniehubov, Aleksandr R. Shyshka, Vikoriia V. Valakh","doi":"10.1163/2211906x-10010014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe purpose of this study is to improve the approaches to the resolution of disputes arising from the arbitrary interference of the judiciary with human rights stipulated by the Convention. The methodological basis of this study consists of: the method of comparative legal analysis; the method of linguistic and systematic interpretation of legal texts; and synthesis of European Court of Human Rights decisions. The paper examines European Court of Human Rights decisions regarding arbitrary interference by the state with human rights. The authors of this scientific paper identify groups of the most common human rights breaches arising from the administration of justice by national courts. The results of the study suggest that it seems necessary and justified in any democratic society to have certain safeguards in the law of the respective state, namely, a certain set of legal safeguards against arbitrary interference with human rights by the judiciary.","PeriodicalId":38000,"journal":{"name":"Global Journal of Comparative Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Arbitrary Judicial Interference in Human Rights Guaranteed by the Convention\",\"authors\":\"S. A. Slipchenko, Oleh Syniehubov, Aleksandr R. Shyshka, Vikoriia V. Valakh\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/2211906x-10010014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe purpose of this study is to improve the approaches to the resolution of disputes arising from the arbitrary interference of the judiciary with human rights stipulated by the Convention. The methodological basis of this study consists of: the method of comparative legal analysis; the method of linguistic and systematic interpretation of legal texts; and synthesis of European Court of Human Rights decisions. The paper examines European Court of Human Rights decisions regarding arbitrary interference by the state with human rights. The authors of this scientific paper identify groups of the most common human rights breaches arising from the administration of justice by national courts. The results of the study suggest that it seems necessary and justified in any democratic society to have certain safeguards in the law of the respective state, namely, a certain set of legal safeguards against arbitrary interference with human rights by the judiciary.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38000,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Journal of Comparative Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Journal of Comparative Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/2211906x-10010014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Journal of Comparative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/2211906x-10010014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究的目的是改进解决因司法部门任意干涉《公约》规定的人权而引起的争端的方法。本研究的方法论基础包括:比较法律分析法;法律文本的语言和系统解释方法;以及欧洲人权法院裁决的综合。本文件审查了欧洲人权法院关于国家任意干涉人权的裁决。这篇科学论文的作者确定了国家法院司法中最常见的侵犯人权行为。研究结果表明,在任何民主社会中,在各自国家的法律中制定某些保障措施似乎都是必要和合理的,即针对司法部门任意干涉人权的某种法律保障措施。
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
Arbitrary Judicial Interference in Human Rights Guaranteed by the Convention
The purpose of this study is to improve the approaches to the resolution of disputes arising from the arbitrary interference of the judiciary with human rights stipulated by the Convention. The methodological basis of this study consists of: the method of comparative legal analysis; the method of linguistic and systematic interpretation of legal texts; and synthesis of European Court of Human Rights decisions. The paper examines European Court of Human Rights decisions regarding arbitrary interference by the state with human rights. The authors of this scientific paper identify groups of the most common human rights breaches arising from the administration of justice by national courts. The results of the study suggest that it seems necessary and justified in any democratic society to have certain safeguards in the law of the respective state, namely, a certain set of legal safeguards against arbitrary interference with human rights by the judiciary.
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
Global Journal of Comparative Law
Global Journal of Comparative Law Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: The Global Journal of Comparative Law is a peer reviewed periodical that provides a dynamic platform for the dissemination of ideas on comparative law and reports on developments in the field of comparative law from all parts of the world. In our contemporary globalized world, it is almost impossible to isolate developments in the law in one jurisdiction or society from another. At the same time, what is traditionally called comparative law is increasingly subsumed under aspects of International Law. The Global Journal of Comparative Law therefore aims to maintain the discipline of comparative legal studies as vigorous and dynamic by deepening the space for comparative work in its transnational context.
期刊最新文献
Access to Public Documents and Its Restrictions: a Reflection from the Perspectives of Brazil and Sweden Comparative Study of Selected Nigerian and Indian Labour Practices and the Law The Irony in the Lineage of Modern Chinese Constitutions and Constitutionalism Regulating Surrogacy as a Reproductive Practice in India and Sri Lanka Use of Specialized Tribunals for the Settlement of Construction Projects in Times of a Financial Crisis
×
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