Should same sex couples have a right to marriage? This question has been debated frequently during the last two decades. The legislation across Europe shows a divide between countries that have legalised same-sex marriage and countries that have introduced constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. Using a theory that emphasises the moral dimension of human rights, I examine the right to marriage in the European Convention of Human Rights from an ethical perspective. The purpose of this thesis is threefold. The first aim is to investigate how the right to marriage is regulated in The European Convention on Human Rights and how its interpreted by The European Court of Human Rights. The second aim is to identify and assess central arguments in the debate about same sex marriage from a human rights perspective. The third and final aim is to perform a critical examination of the right to marriage in the European Convention of Human rights from an ethical perspective.   This study shows that The European Court of Human Rights is cautious in its interpretation of the right to marriage and has chosen to await a European consensus before including same-sex couples in the right to marriage. By looking closer at the evolutionary interpretation of the convention, as discussed by George Letsas & Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou, I conclude that this interpretation should be based on certain moral principles. Through the examination of central arguments in the same-sex marriage debate I draw the conclusion that same sex couples have a moral right to marriage. Thus, this thesis suggests that there is a contradiction between the moral dimension of human rights and The European Court of Human Rights interpretation of the right to marriage for same-sex couples. I therefore argue that there should be an ethical demand to include same sex-couples in the right to marriage.

Gender violence in Mexico is a problem that affects its society on a long- term basis. Its most extreme form known as feminicide, that is a gender- based murder of women, appears with so much frequency that it can be considered a structural problem yet. Mexico is one of the countries with most cases in Latin America, however, insufficient and ineffective measures taken by the state facilitate their perpetration which is often immune from prosecution. This thesis aims to approximate the issue to the reader and explain the concept of feminicide in given context within its complexity. For that purpose, a process tracing analysis of two selected cases is done; starting from their perpetration to their sentencing by judicial instances. The sentences of both cases became very important milestones. The factors that contributed to the outcome are tracked and afterwards a comparison of tracked causal mechanisms is done. As it was already mentioned, the cases were not selected randomly. Not only are they important for their sentences, but moreover they took place in two Mexican states with traditionally high numbers of committed feminicides, that is in Chihuahua and Mexico State. The results of the analysis suggest that even though Mexico has signed the most important international conventions about women's...

This diploma thesis analyses the status of social rights in the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. It aims to show, particularly through the analysis of selected court decisions, how the European Court of Human Rights, as a control mechanism established by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms seeking to provide recognised rights and freedoms with practical and effective protection, deals with the absence of social rights in the Convention's catalogue. The thesis is divided into four chapters. The first chapter is dedicated to the brief description of the Convention, its control mechanism and the catalogue of declared fundamental rights and freedoms. In this section the thesis also deals with the question, what were the reasons that lead to the absence of social rights in the Convention's catalogue and what consequences can be draw from this fact for the status of social rights. In this context the thesis discusses the principle of indivisibility of human rights, according to which all human rights hold an equal status and which requires that human rights of all categories are protected and promoted with the same emphasis. The second chapter deals with the way the Court includes social aspects of guaranteed civil and political rights in its...

1 Discrimination against Muslims in Europe The topic of this thesis is primarily the issue of discrimination or non-discrimination of Muslims in Europe. I chose this issue due to the topicality of the topic and, in my opinion, insufficient processing by expert sources. It is currently a major geopolitical problem that Europe is trying to tackle. Whether successfully or unsuccessfully is the topic of this thesis and, above all, the answer to this question depends on the reader of this thesis. Given the situation in predominantly Muslim countries, there is a large influx of migrants who are supporters of Islam. Europe is trying to respond to this situation, but all systems are not changing fast enough to satisfy all parties, with this in mind, there are disputes between the Muslim and non-Muslim populations. The thesis deals with the issues of discrimination and equality in general, where the individual divisions and approaches (direct, indirect, formal, material, equality of opportunities and equality of results, positive, negative) are elaborated. Subsequently, the thesis contains a historical-cultural excursion to Islam (origin of religion, description of historical events, explanation of basic terms, division and specification of sources, the way of Muhammad, pillars of Islam) with emphasis on important...

<p style="text-align: justify;">Објективна је чињеница да је Европски суд за људска права најстарији међународни форум за заштиту људских права. Вредносна оцена, да је овај Суд уз то и најзначајнији и најуспешнији суд такве врсте, последњих деценија постала је практично опште место у правној теорији. Као разлози успеха, уобичајено се наводе две чињенице: висок степен поверења које Суд ужива од стране држава чланица и лица која му се обраћају те велики утицај који је пракса тог Суда имала на укупан развој људских права на европском континенту али и шире.<br />Највећи утицај Европски суд за људска права, остварио је у домену успостављања стандарда заштите слобода и права гарантованих Конвенцијом, а који стандарди су доцније имплементирани на националном нивоу држава чланица. У том смислу, значај праксе Суда превазилази збир појединачно пружене заштите сваком од лица чија је представка у досадашњој историји Суда усвојена. Корпус судске праксе из које произилазе бројни стандарди заштите данас је у многоме полазна тачка у аргументацији и националних законодаваца и националних судова.<br />Из наведеног произилази и осетљива позиција коју Суд заузима у контролном механизму Конвенције. Са једне стране, да би био ефикасан, од њега се очекује да кроз своју праксу и даље утиче на заштиту људских права и слобода и да том праксом (некада непосредно, а некада посредно) интервенише на пољу остварења и заштите права и слобода на националном нивоу. Са друге стране, Суд мора оправдати висок степен поверења држава чланица, чијом је вољом постао и чијем вољом опстаје на међународној сцени. Државе чланице, осетљиве су у погледу очувања сопственог суверенитета, па тако, када Суд прекорачи границе интервенције на које су државе &bdquo;навикле― оне Суду упућују позиве да свој &bdquo;интервенционизам― ограничи.<br />На описани начин ствара се једна врста вертикалне тензије између Суда и држава чланица, услед чега је Суд приморан да у свом одлучивању балансира између захтева да пружи ефикасну и ефективну заштиту људских права, и захтева да своју интервенцију у националне правне поретке сведе на прихватљиву границу.<br />Алат који Суд корити у поступку таквог балансирања управо јесте начело супсидијарности. Ово начело, у својој досадашњој пракси, Суд је означио као једно од основних и најважнијих начела свог функционисања, наводећи да је оно инхерентно механизму заштите који Конвенција успоставља. Услед специфичне позиције коју заузима, Суд начело супсидијарности користи и као штит, да би ограничио поље и начин свог деловања и тиме се заштитио од критика држава чланица; али и као мач, као средство које му даје основа да нападне неправду коју је уочио и интервенише у циљу пружања ефективне заштите права.<br />Циљ овог рада управо јесте да испита сва релевантна питања која се постављају у вези са овим важним начелом функционисања Суда.<br />У раду ће бити испитано најпре шта је то супсидијарност али и како се она развијала ван контролног механизма Конвенције да би се могла упоредити са супсидијарношћу у оквиру контролног механизма Конвенције. Биће испитано када се супсидијарност први пут јавља у пракси Суда, колико често се јавља у пракси и са којим последицама. Испитаће се посебно које правне инструменте из Конвенције и сопствене праксе Суд користи као израз начела супсидијарности, те како и из којих разлога ти инструменти делују као штит или као мач.</p> / <p style="text-align: justify;">Objektivna je činjenica da je Evropski sud za ljudska prava najstariji međunarodni forum za zaštitu ljudskih prava. Vrednosna ocena, da je ovaj Sud uz to i najznačajniji i najuspešniji sud takve vrste, poslednjih decenija postala je praktično opšte mesto u pravnoj teoriji. Kao razlozi uspeha, uobičajeno se navode dve činjenice: visok stepen poverenja koje Sud uživa od strane država članica i lica koja mu se obraćaju te veliki uticaj koji je praksa tog Suda imala na ukupan razvoj ljudskih prava na evropskom kontinentu ali i šire.<br />Najveći uticaj Evropski sud za ljudska prava, ostvario je u domenu uspostavljanja standarda zaštite sloboda i prava garantovanih Konvencijom, a koji standardi su docnije implementirani na nacionalnom nivou država članica. U tom smislu, značaj prakse Suda prevazilazi zbir pojedinačno pružene zaštite svakom od lica čija je predstavka u dosadašnjoj istoriji Suda usvojena. Korpus sudske prakse iz koje proizilaze brojni standardi zaštite danas je u mnogome polazna tačka u argumentaciji i nacionalnih zakonodavaca i nacionalnih sudova.<br />Iz navedenog proizilazi i osetljiva pozicija koju Sud zauzima u kontrolnom mehanizmu Konvencije. Sa jedne strane, da bi bio efikasan, od njega se očekuje da kroz svoju praksu i dalje utiče na zaštitu ljudskih prava i sloboda i da tom praksom (nekada neposredno, a nekada posredno) interveniše na polju ostvarenja i zaštite prava i sloboda na nacionalnom nivou. Sa druge strane, Sud mora opravdati visok stepen poverenja država članica, čijom je voljom postao i čijem voljom opstaje na međunarodnoj sceni. Države članice, osetljive su u pogledu očuvanja sopstvenog suvereniteta, pa tako, kada Sud prekorači granice intervencije na koje su države &bdquo;navikle― one Sudu upućuju pozive da svoj &bdquo;intervencionizam― ograniči.<br />Na opisani način stvara se jedna vrsta vertikalne tenzije između Suda i država članica, usled čega je Sud primoran da u svom odlučivanju balansira između zahteva da pruži efikasnu i efektivnu zaštitu ljudskih prava, i zahteva da svoju intervenciju u nacionalne pravne poretke svede na prihvatljivu granicu.<br />Alat koji Sud koriti u postupku takvog balansiranja upravo jeste načelo supsidijarnosti. Ovo načelo, u svojoj dosadašnjoj praksi, Sud je označio kao jedno od osnovnih i najvažnijih načela svog funkcionisanja, navodeći da je ono inherentno mehanizmu zaštite koji Konvencija uspostavlja. Usled specifične pozicije koju zauzima, Sud načelo supsidijarnosti koristi i kao štit, da bi ograničio polje i način svog delovanja i time se zaštitio od kritika država članica; ali i kao mač, kao sredstvo koje mu daje osnova da napadne nepravdu koju je uočio i interveniše u cilju pružanja efektivne zaštite prava.<br />Cilj ovog rada upravo jeste da ispita sva relevantna pitanja koja se postavljaju u vezi sa ovim važnim načelom funkcionisanja Suda.<br />U radu će biti ispitano najpre šta je to supsidijarnost ali i kako se ona razvijala van kontrolnog mehanizma Konvencije da bi se mogla uporediti sa supsidijarnošću u okviru kontrolnog mehanizma Konvencije. Biće ispitano kada se supsidijarnost prvi put javlja u praksi Suda, koliko često se javlja u praksi i sa kojim posledicama. Ispitaće se posebno koje pravne instrumente iz Konvencije i sopstvene prakse Sud koristi kao izraz načela supsidijarnosti, te kako i iz kojih razloga ti instrumenti deluju kao štit ili kao mač.</p> / <p style="text-align: justify;">European Court of Human Rights (EctHR) is the oldest international forum for the protection of human rights. The opinion that the European Court of Human Rights is the most important and most successful court of its kind has become, in recent decades, a matter of uncontested consensus in legal theory. There are two main commonly cited reasons for such success: the high level of confidence that the Court enjoys from the Member States and the persons who turn to it, and the great influence that the jurisprudence of that Court has on the overall development of human rights on the European continent, and beyond.</p><p>The greatest impact of the EctHR can be found in the domain of the establishment of standards for the protection of freedoms and rights guaranteed by the Convention, which were subsequently implemented at the national level of the Member States. In this respect, the importance of the Court&#39;s practice goes beyond the sum of individual protection provided to each of the persons whose application in the previous history of the Court has been upheld. The current case law, which gave rise to development of human rights standards, necessarily plays a vital role in human rights argumentation of both national legislators and national courts.</p><p>Bearing in mind the reasons for the Court&lsquo;s success mentioned above, it seems that there is a delicate position that the Court holds within the control mechanism of the Convention. On the one hand, the Court needs to intervene into national legal orders of the Member States (directly or indirectly) when those States fail to secure guaranties provided in the Convention. On the other hand, the Court must justify a high degree of confidence among the Member States, who constituted the Court and whose consent made the Court a prominent actor on international stage. Member States are sensitive in terms of preserving their own sovereignty. When the Court exceeds the limits of intervention to which States are &quot;accustomed&quot; they call upon the Court to limit its &quot;interventionism&quot;.</p><p>In this way, a sort of a vertical tension is created between the Court and the Member States, which is why the Court is compelled to balance its decisions between the requirement to provide efficient and effective protection of human rights, on one hand, and demands that its intervention into national legal orders should be reduced to an acceptable margin, on the other.</p><p>The mechanism used by the Court in the process of such balancing is, in fact, the principle of subsidiarity. This principle has been designated by the Court as one of the fundamental and supreme principles of its functioning, and as a principle that is inherent to the protection mechanism established by the Convention. Due to its specific position the Court has used the principle of subsidiarity both as a shield and as a sword. As a shield when required to limit the scope and method of its functioning thereby protecting itself from the criticism of the Member States. As a sword, when grappling with the manifest injustice on national level in order to intervene and provide effective protection of human rights.</p><p>The aim of this dissertation is to examine all the relevant issues raised in relation to this important principle of the functioning of the Court.This dissertation will firstly examine subsidiarity and how it evolved outside the control mechanism of the Convention, in order to be able to compare it with subsidiarity within the Convention&#39;s control mechanism. Furthermore, the research covers issues of frequency and consequences of the principle of subsidiarity in the Court&lsquo;s jurisprudence. The goal of the research is also to detect legal arguments and legal concepts used by the Court to express the principle of subsidiarity. The task is to examine whether and when these concepts and arguments are used as a shield or as a sword.</p>

No description available.

Cette étude a pour but de présenter le dialogue entre les juges de la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (CEDH) et de la Cour interaméricaine des droits de l’homme (CIADH), deux Cours régionales supranationales, visant toutes deux à garantir le respect des droits fondamentaux. Le dialogue est étudié à travers l’analyse du contentieux portant sur l’intégrité de la personne humaine et sur la protection des droits économiques et sociaux. Ce sujet se rattache au contexte de mondialisation qui vient transformer les relations de pouvoir et révèle l’émancipation des juges dans la régulation transgouvernementale. Le présent mémoire conclut que le dialogue vise à établir une cohérence entre les systèmes afin de faire prévaloir une vision commune des droits de l’homme à travers la constitution d’un espace euro-américain, tel un réseau d’échange informel. Néanmoins, le dialogue est limité par certains facteurs contextuels liés aux réalités contrastées des deux systèmes régionaux ainsi que par la volonté des acteurs étatiques. / This research aims to present the dialogue between judges of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human rights (IAHR). These two supranational regional courts both aim at ensuring respect for fundamental rights within their jurisdiction. The dialogue between them is analysed through the study of disputes regarding the integrity of human being and the protection of economic and social rights. This subject is greatly linked to the context of power shifts induced by globalization and reveals how judges are emancipating themselves through transgovernemental regulatory networks. In conclusion, this thesis demonstrates the dialogue’s objective to establish a certain coherence between the systems and to allow a common vision of human rights to be brought forward through the constitution of an informal exchange network now known as the Euro-American interspace. However, the dialogue is restricted by many contextual factors and the contrasted realities of the two regional systems, as well as the will of state actors.

No description available.

La responsabilité des entreprises en matière de droits de l’homme implique une série d’obligations et des responsabilités de nature diverse, tant pour les États que pour les entreprises mêmes, afin d’identifier, prévenir ou réparer les atteintes aux droits de l’homme. Toutefois, le droit international est appelé à jouer un rôle de « guide », tandis que la pratique étatique de droit interne et des entreprises peuvent éventuellement se cristalliser en une série d’obligations contraignantes permettant de mettre en œuvre les principes, les droits et les responsabilités établies à l’échelle internationale. / Corporate responsibility in the field of human rights implies a series of obligations and responsibilities of diverse nature, both for States and businesses, in order to identify, prevent and redress potential human rights violations. Nevertheless, international law is called to play merely a "guiding role", while State practice at the domestic level, as well as corporate practice, can eventually transform into a series of binding obligations allowing to put in practice the principles, rights and responsibilities established at the international level.

Ne bis in idem est bien défini dans les droits nationaux comme un principe fondamental du procès pénal selon lequel un individu ne peut pas être poursuivi deux fois pour les mêmes faits. Mais, en passant au niveau international, le principe familier se change en objet juridique non identifié. Les cours supranationales qui l'abordent en matière pénale (Cour interaméricaine des droits de l'homme, Cour européenne des droits de l'homme, Cour de justice de l'Union européenne, Cour pénale internationale) interprètent des formulations disparates de ne bis in idem à partir desquelles elles forgent leurs variantes. Si l'identité de ne bis in idem semble alors se déliter, il ne s'agit pas d'une disparition. Modelé par les discours de ces cours qui se croisent, se rencontrent ou s'ignorent, ne bis in idem se métamorphose. Au-delà des variantes il est possible d'identifier des mouvements communs dans la fabrique de ne bis in idem : la recherche de cohérences spatiale et temporelle ainsi que le besoin de répondre à la dialectique du bis et de l'idem. De plus, la métamorphose est tantôt création tantôt déconstruction. Les cours consacrent ne bis in idem autant qu'elles le malmènent en établissant de nouveaux contournements. Par exemple, elles permettent de plus en plus de rejuger pour lutter contre l'impunité après une parodie de procès. Ces mouvements contraires conduisent à interroger la nature ambivalente de ne bis in idem entre facettes garantiste et structurelle et entre règle et principe. Enfin, ne bis in idem étant un catalyseur de leurs échanges, cette étude offre une perspective unique sur le rôle des cours supranationales dans l'internationalisation de la justice pénale. / Ne bis in idem (prohibition of double jeopardy) is well defined in national legal frameworks as a fondamental principle of criminal proceedings according to which an individual cannot be prosecuted twice for the same conduct. But, when moving to the international level, the familiar principle becomes an unidentified legal object. The supranational courts that deal with it in criminal matters (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, European Court of Human Rights, Court of Justice of the European Union and International Criminal Court) interpret disparate ne bis in idem formulations from which they construct their variations. If the identity of ne bis in idem then seems to be diluting, it is not disappearing. Shaped by the discourses of these courts that cross paths, meet or ignore each other, ne bis in idem is metamorphosed. Despite the variants, it is possible to identify common movements in the making of ne bis in idem : the search for spatial and temporal coherency and the need to respond to the dialectics of bis and idem. Moreover, metamorphosis is construction as much as deconstruction. The courts enshrine ne bis in idem as much as they circumvent it by establishing new limits and bypasses. For instance, they allow more and more a second procedure to fight impunity if the first procedure constituted a sham trial. These contrary movements lead to questioning the ambivalent nature of ne bis in idem between its two facets as guarantee and structural element and between rule and principle. Finally, as ne bis in idem is a catalyst for their exchanges, this study offers a unique perspective on the role of supranational courts in the internationalization of criminal justice.