Depuis la fondation de la République Turque en 1923, la laïcité constitue le principe le plus discuté et controversé, notamment car le rejet d’un des autres principes n’a jamais été perçu, comme c’est le cas pour la laïcité, comme impliquant un rejet de la République elle-même. Que signifie la laïcité pour la Turquie ? Le renforcement de l’autorité des élites ? Ou le sens de la République ? Aujourd’hui, comment comprenons-nous la laïcité, et avons-nous besoin de la redéfinir ? Sans réaliser une analyse poussée des fondements socio-religieux du pays, les travaux étudiant la laïcité turque ont tendance à se borner à des descriptions formelles et rigides. La laïcité est le principe juridique exprimant la neutralité de l’État envers toutes les croyances religieuses, et sa purification de toutes références religieuses. Néanmoins dans les faits, nous n’avons jamais vu une telle application de laïcité, si pure et théorique. Ce qui fait de la laïcité un instrument d’oppression est en réalité, un ensemble de symboles et de mythes encerclant le sens de la laïcité. Cet ensemble de symboles et de mythes constitue une religion politique, rigide et incontestable. Pour cette raison, les travaux étudiant l’application du principe de laïcité ont perçu les symboles de la religion politique comme une laïcité distincte et particulière. Dans notre travail, nous allons étudier les bases historiques et philosophiques de la laïcité en Turquie. Notre but est de mettre en relief les origines de la laïcité et son évolution en tant que religion politique, opposée à l’Islam traditionnel et politique. Dans la dernière partie de notre travail, nous allons étudier la laïcité en Turquie dans le contexte de la démocratie, à la lumière de la jurisprudence de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l’Homme, afin de savoir s’il est nécessaire de la redéfinir. / Since the foundation of the Republic of Turkey in 1923 the secularism « la laïcité » is discussed much more than any other topic and its denial meant the denial of Turkish Republic. However, what does secularism mean for Turkey? Is it the reinforcement of elite’s authorities? Or is it the definition of Republic? Nowadays, how do we understand secularism and do we need to redefine it? In Turkey most of the academic works about secularism are still not brining any additional value rather than staying as another description of secularism. The dictionary description of secularism « la laïcité » is that, the state must be natural against all religious beliefs and do not stand as a reference point for any religion. But in practice, the secularism cannot be defined as straight as its definition, it never appears with those sharp borders and in that purity. The factors, which are transforming secularism from a legitimate view to a control mechanism, are its symbols and myths that are considered as part of secularism. Actually, these myths and symbols are forming an undeniable political religion. For that reason most of the previous academic works which are analyzing secularism by considering these myths and symbols as an add-on to the term of secularism, pushed us to look and create a new definition of this concept. In this work, we will analyse the historical and philosophical basis of secularism. We will also trace the origin and the formation of secularism as a political religion opposite to the traditional and political Islam. In this work, we will analyse the historical and philosophical basis of secularism. We will also trace the origin and the formation of secularism as a political religion opposite to the traditional and political Islam.The final part of work will observe secularism in the light of the jurisprudence of the European Convention of Human Rights and, the democracy in order to understand if the notion of secularism in Turkey requires redefinition.

The diploma thesis regarding The Legal Aspects of Mandatory Vaccination and its European Context was created in order to map the legal regulations of mandatory vaccination in the Czech Republic and to describe the repressions of unvaccinated children in the Czech Republic and in other member states of the European Union. Part of the thesis consists of a jurisprudence research of The Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic, The European Court of Human Rights and The Court of Justice of the European Union related to the field of mandatory vaccination. Special focus is given to the comparison of the number of mandatory vaccinations in the member states of European Union as well as to the comparison of their legislations. The fundamental question reflected in the diploma thesis is the one of the human rights of individuals guaranteed by the European Union, international conventions and national legislations of the states and the possibility for them to be limited in order to protect the public health. In the thesis, there are listed and described the human rights affected by the whole concept of vaccination and also the conditions that have to be fulfilled in order to allow the human rights to be restricted. For this purpose the cases from legal practise serve as a support. In addition, there is a chapter regarding the promotion of newly developed vaccines for voluntary vaccinations, which reveals the marketing tools used for this purpose. For a better understanding of the field of mandatory vaccination, there is included a chapter titled The Insight of Expertise Necessary for the Interpretation and Application of Law. This chapter completes the aspects of mandatory vaccination from the medical point of view, lists the mandatory vaccinations in the Czech Republic and member states of the European Union and the vaccines used for performing the vaccinations. Keywords: human rights, mandatory vaccination, jurisprudence of The European Court of Human Rights and The Court of Justice of the European Union, repressions of unvaccinated children

This thesis aims to identify divergent interpretations of particular ECHR's articles in jurisdiction of the CJEU and the ECtHR using methods of analysis and comparison. An interim target is to define the scope and powers of the CJEU and the ECtHR in relation to the ECHR. Initial hypothesis states: "The EU accession to the ECHR would help to eliminate inconsistencies in interpretation of the ECHR and to define a clear relationship between the CJEU and the ECtHR."

The right of freedom of expression is often mentioned as one of the most significant human rights. Despite its importance and necessity for functioning and development of any democratic society, this right is not without limits. The aim of this theses is to find the limits of the right of freedom of expression within the system of the ECHR which represents one of the most important documents in the human rights field at the international level. The important position of freedom of expression will be proved by an analysis of the theoretical context of freedom of expression in the system of the ECHR as well as by examination of the work of the European Court of Human Rights and its case law connected to the right of freedom of expression.

In this article I develop a normative theory of the subsidiarity principle in international adjudication, which seeks to offer a balanced answer to the question of to what extent is it legitimate for a body such as the European Court of Human Rights to interfere with the national criteria in the face of a complaint on conventional rights violation. In contrast with demands for greater deference to states in both Europe and Latin America, based on a statist idea of subsidiarity, I articulate a «cooperative» understanding of the ideas of human rights and the principle of subsidiarity, linking them to Buchanan’s notion of ecological legitimacy. The proposal I defend leads to a division of institutional labor within regional human rights systems that increases the legitimacy of all the institutions involved. At the same time, I devote the last part of the paper to implement such cooperative view, on the one hand, showing the importance of an incremental logic in the effective protection of human rights and, on the other hand, offering a rationalized version of the national margin of appreciation doctrine. / En este trabajo desarrollo una teoría normativa del principio de subsidiariedad en la adjudicación internacional que pretende ofrecer una respuesta equilibrada a la pregunta de hasta qué punto es legítimo para un órgano como el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos interferir en el criterio estatal cuando valora una denuncia por violación de derechos convencionales. Frente a las demandas de una mayor deferencia hacia los Estados que encontramos tanto en Europa como en Latinoamérica, basadas en una idea estatista de la subsidiariedad, articulo una concepción «cooperativa» de los derechos humanos y del principio de subsidiariedad, uniéndolas a la idea de legitimidad ecológica sugerida por Buchanan. La propuesta que defiendo conduce a una división del trabajo institucional dentro de los sistemas regionales de derechos humanos que aumenta la legitimidad de todas las instituciones involucradas. Al mismo tiempo, desarrollo una forma de implementar esta concepción cooperativa, por una parte, mostrando la importancia de una lógica incremental en la protección efectiva de derechos humanos y, por otra parte, ofreciendo una versión racionalizada de la doctrina del margen de apreciación estatal.

Le phénomène de désétatisation de l’utilisation de la notion d’intérêt général conduit à s’intéresser au rôle que cette notion joue dans le cadre du système de la Convention. Dans le contexte de la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme, l’intérêt général ne se manifeste pas seulement comme un concept consubstantiellement lié à l’État. En effet, la nature indéterminée, flexible et fonctionnelle de l’intérêt général permet l’utilisation de cette notion par les divers acteurs du système conventionnel et facilite, par conséquent, son intégration dans ce même système. Face à une diversité des utilisateurs de la notion d’intérêt général, l’utilisation effectuée par la Cour européenne des droits de l’Homme se démarque en particulier en raison de son pouvoir d’interprète authentique. Cela permet de s’interroger sur l’existence d’une conception de l’intérêt général propre au système de la Convention ainsi que sur les fonctions que l’intérêt général occupe dans le cadre de ce système. / The phenomenon of destatization of the use of the notion of general interest raises questions with regard to the role that this concept plays in the system of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the context of the European Convention, the general interest does not manifest itself as a concept consubstantially linked to the State. Indeed, the indeterminate, flexible and functional nature of the general interest allows the use of this concept by various actors of the system of the European Convention and facilitates its integration into this system. Faced with the diversity of users of the concept of general interest, the use by the European Court of Human Rights stands out in particular because of its power of authentic interpretation. This makes it possible to question the existence of a conception of the general interest specific to the system of the Convention and to research the functions of general interest in this context.

La Turquie est membre du Conseil de l’Europe (COE) depuis 1949. Ainsi, elle fait partie intégrante de l’histoire de la construction démocratique de l'Europe. Cette thèse fait une histoire quasi exhaustive de la démocratisation en Turquie inspirée par le COE de 1949 à 2013. Les acteurs sont l’Assemblée Parlementaire, le Comité des Ministres, la Cour Européenne des Droits de l’Homme, les autorités compétentes turques et la société civile. Les principales sources de ce travail sont les archives du COE, celles de la Grande Assemblée Nationale de Turquie et des organisations du secteur privé et civil et les ouvrages académiques et littéraires. Dans ces relations durant 64 ans, quatre étapes se surviennent. 1. L’intégration de la Turquie aux institutions européennes, 2. Les interventions militaires en Turquie, 3. L’approfondissement de la démocratie en Turquie à la suite de la guerre froide, 4. Les procédures de suivi appliquées par les mécanismes du COE sur la démocratisation en Turquie. / Turkey is a member of the Council of Europe (COE) since 1949. Thus, it is an integral part of the history of European democratic construction.This thesis is a nearly complete history of democratization in Turkey inspired by the COE from 1949 to 2013. The actors are the Parliamentary Assembly, the Committee of Ministers, the European Court of Human Rights, the competent authorities of Turkey and civil society. The main sources of this work are the archives of the COE, those of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, and organizations in the private and civil sector and the academic and literary works. In these relationships for 64 years, four steps occurred. 1. The integration of Turkey to the European institutions, 2. The military interventions in Turkey, 3. The deepening democracy in Turkey after the Cold War, 4. The monitoring procedures followed by the mechanisms of the COE on democratization in Turkey.

"The purpose of this study is to interrogate the doctrine of margin of appreciation as applied in the European Court of Human Rights and establish amenable lessos to the African human rights system. As such, the author will be able to draw appropriate and informed recommendations on the prospects of the doctrine in African context. In other words, the study proceeds from the approach that 'diversity' alone is not enough to guarantee application of margin of appreciation. Rather, a variety of factors come into consideration while weighing whether margin of appreciation should be granted to states. Indeed, such benchmarks will inform the discourse of this study, while at the same time acknowledging that a comparative study between European and African systems cannot be possible. The premise for disqualifying a comparison assumes that margin of appreciation presupposes a democratic society. Thus, while the member states of the ECHR have attained high levels of human rights records, some of their counterparts in Africa are still marred by embarrassing human rights records." -- Preamble. "Chapter one introduces the study and the context in which it is set. It highlights the basis and structure of the study. Chapter two makes reference to the connotation, origin and development of the doctrine of margin of appreciation. It discusses also contours and varying degrees of the doctrine's application with particular regard to respect of the rule of law. In addition, difficulties linked to the doctrine are highlighted. Chapter three highlights policy grounds underlying margin of appreciation in the European Court of Human Rights. It starts from most decisive policy grounds and moves to weaker ones. Chapter four examines the legal basis for application of the doctrine of margin of appreciation under the African Charter. It further notes the attitude of African states through their submissions claiming margin. The Prince case as the first of its kind to invoke margin of appreciation is discussed. Chapter five attempts to identify the defensibility and indefensibility of the doctrine in [the] African human rights system. Chapter six consists of a summary of the presentation and the conclusions drawn from the entire study." -- Introduction. / Prepared under the supervision of Prof. Gilles Cistac at the Faculty of Law, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, Maputo, Mocambique / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2006. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

Le Conseil de l'Europe -créé à la suite de la Seconde Guerre mondiale afin de reconstruire un espace démocratique et juridique commun -dont les travaux sur le droit pénal des mineurs sont issus des évolutions nationales entamées au début du XXe siècle, s'attacha à valoriser l'expérience des juridictions spécialisées existantes dans quelques pays européens et grâce auxquelles les mineurs commençaient à faire l'objet d'un traitement différencié de celui des adultes. Depuis, observant les préoccupations des États membres à l'égard de la délinquance juvénile et les contours changeants de leurs politiques pénales, le Comité des Ministres du Conseil de l'Europe élabore, au moyen de recherches criminologiques et comparatives, de colloques et de conférences, des recommandations et lignes directrices conduisant à l'harmonisation des droits nationaux autour de principes directeurs. Mue par son engagement dans l'européanisation du droit pénal des mineurs, la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme intégra les instruments internationaux et européens pertinents dans sa jurisprudence. Ce qui prend un caractère primordial dans les pays où l'application de la Convention est problématique et les violations des droits de l'homme récurrentes, parmi lesquels la Turquie. En conséquence, et malgré les modifications apportées dans la législation turque depuis 2005, nous ferons apparaître dans cette étude que ce membre du Conseil de l'Europe méconnaît encore l'autonomie de l'enfant, promeut toujours la punition en modèle éducatif, use régulièrement de la détention, et appréhende finalement de manière balbutiante la primauté de l'éducation sur la répression prônée par les principes directeurs. / The work by the Council of Europe -founded following the Second World War to rebuild a common democratic and legal order-in the field of juvenile justice has been influenced by the national developments emerged in the early twentieth century and has been focusing on enhancing the experiences of the existing special judicial bodies in some European countries of which were established for distinguishing the treatment of juvenile delinquent from adults. Since then, the Comrnittee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which observes the concerns of the member states on juvenile delinquency as well as their changing criminal justice policies, adopts recommendations and guidelines in order to establish guiding principles leading to harmonization of the national systems through organizing meetings, conferences and conducting comparative research on criminology. Similarly, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) gives reference to the relevant international and European instruments in its jurisprudence so as to contribute to the Europeanisation of juvenile justice. This becomes especially important in countries like Turkey-where the implementation of the ECHR is problematic and human rights violations are recurring. Consequently, this study shows that despite the legislative changes made since 2005, Turkey, which is a member of the Council of Europe, still ignores the autonomy of the child, promotes punishment like an educational method, resort to detention as a regular measure, and finally displays an reluctant and abstaining attitude in giving priority to education over punishment as established by the guidelines.

La Turquie va-t-elle adhérer à l'Union européenne? Sa candidature a toujours été sujette à critiques: droits de l'homme non respectés, restrictions des droits et libertés, notamment de la liberté d'expression, de religion et des droits politiques. Les dossiers sensibles comme le problème kurde et la question chypriote sont à l'origine des multiples plaintes contre l'État turc devant la Cour européenne des droits de l'homme. Dotée des caractéristiques essentielles d'un État moderne et laïque, le pays dispose de structures formellement démocratiques, mais sa démocratie se révèle fragile: ses politiques tant internes qu'externes sont décidées par un Conseil national de sécurité composé pour l'essentiel de militaires. En outre, l'armée qui a pris le pouvoir à maintes reprises a donné au régime une dimension autoritaire. Cela non seulement en vertu des principes fondateurs de la République (tradition centralisatrice de l'État turc), mais aussi de la priorité que l'institution militaire accorde à la sécurité, à l'unité et à l'identité nationales. En effet, les mesures d'exception (état d'urgence, cours de sûreté de l'État, loi anti-terroriste) ont contribué aux violations des droits de l'homme, d'où l'opposition entre le droit conventionnel et le droit national. De plus, le système judiciaire et administratif instauré par les militaires en 1982 n'est pas conçu dans l'intérêt des justiciables. Certes, l'accès à la modernité n'a pu se faire que sous la contrainte et le contrôle de l'armée, mais le régime en Turquie peut-il continuer à s'appuyer sur les«piliers de l'ordre» que sont l'armée, la police et la justice ? L’État semble cependant se réorganiser progressivement pour permettre au pouvoir politique d'assurer un contrôleur les forces de sécurité et pour donner une meilleure indépendance à la justice. Le processus mis en route et les critères imposés pour l'adhésion à l'UE devraient contribuer à mettre en œuvre les réformes institutionnelles capables d'harmoniser la démocratie à l'État de droit, à l'image des pays européens. En effet, les changements récents sont liés à l'agenda européen. Le gouvernement turc semble être déterminé et ambitieux dans sa vocation européenne. Les progrès réalisés pour intégrer l'UE lui sont un moteur de propulsion devant servir au pays et à sa population. / The issue of the accession of Turkey to the European Union is one of the most controversial topics as regards to human rights. The sensitive issues such as the kurdish problem and the conflict with Cyprus are the main cause of the most restrictions of the rights and freedoms and complaints lodged against the Turkish State before the European court of Human Rights. Turkey has the essential characteristics of a modern and secular state, but its democracy prove to be fragile. Thus, the powerful role of the army in many areas of political life can be explained by the malfunctioning of the democracy, giving to the régime an authoritative aspect. The Turkish army is seen as the guardian of the unity, security and identity of the nation. Indeed, the access to modernity is due to the control of the army, but the régime in Turkey needs to undertake major policy reforms to converge with European Union policies. The judicial and administrative system set by the army in 1982 does not sufficiently protect the justiciable. The exceptional measures such as state of emergency, security state courts, anti-terrorist law contributed to the violation of human rights and emphasized the contradiction between conventional law and national law. Turkey has made progress towards modifying its legal system in order to give more independence and impartiality. The accession partnership will certainly enable Turkey to review its Constitution and relevant legislation in providing basic freedoms, the rule of law and respect of human rights in conformity with the European Union's own standards. Turkey's inclusion in the enlargement process has not only increased European Union leverage over Turkish politics, but revitalized Turkey's European vocation.