The European Convention on Human Rights Has to Be Amended

 

The European Convention on Human Rights*1 has to be amended.

An inadmissibility of individual applications causing their rejection by judges of chambers of the potranseuropean Court of Human Rights is an object of this research.

This article aims to ascertain whether certain provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights pertaining to finding individual applications inadmissible, causing a rejection of such applications, fall in compliance with the principles of the Rule of law and with the general doctrine of Judicial Review.

A necessity for such a research of the topic ensues from multiple facts when judges of chambers of the potranseuropean Court of Human Rights, while acting in individual capacity ( i.e. the so- called-single judges) with competence mentioned in Article 27 of the European Convention on Human Rights adopt their decisions which prevent the Court from further making a thorough judicial scrutiny to merits and facts of applications received. One of the proving examples of this is the fact as follows.

Since 2007 the Kyiv Circuit court of Ukraine has not been hearing a law-suit of the Association of Independent jurists and journalists "The Democratic Space" (here and after - the Association) submitted against the Ukrainian State i.e. against: the president of Ukraine; the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine; the Ukrainian parliament; the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine; the State Savings Bank of Ukraine. The law-suit's requirement before the court was: to enact a judgment which could state that the Ukrainian State violated the lawful right of Ukrainian nationals to receive back their economies ever deposited by them in banking facilities of the then Soviet Ukraine, prior to 02 January 1992, and which had not been returned to them since then.

Having ascertained that such a violation occurred on account of gross infringements by a judge of the Kyiv Administrative court of Ukraine, the Association required from the Highest Qualification Committee of judges of Ukraine to institute a disciplinary proceedings against that judge. But this committee, that deals, above all, with questions of bringing judges to disciplinary responsibilities rejected the Association's request without any proving explanations.

Afterwards, on 10 July 2013, the Highest Administrative court of Ukraine by virtue of its resolution rejected the Association's law-suit against the Highest Qualification Committee of judges of Ukraine. Within a necessary deadline of the 6- month-term, the Association submitted an application to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Human Rights (here and after - the Court). In this application the association stated that Ukraine had violated the association's human rights to fair hearing as it is foreseen by Article 6(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

On 20 March 2014 a chamber judge of the Court adopted a decision writing that the Association's application was rejected by him because he had found it inadmissible and as such that might not be appealed before the Grand chamber of the Court. An examination of this very decision both as of some other decisions enacted on account of other applicants' applications showed that such judicial decisions did not fall in compliance: with requirements: of Article 45 of the European Convention on Human Rights; with some democratic principles, such as: the Rule of law; the judicial review; and the transparency.

In 1977 influential political theorist and professor of law at the Columbia Univers

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How You Can Turnaround Your European Business

 CEOs and CFOs often feel like they are following in the footsteps of Don Quixote when they try to restructure business operations in Europe. In theory, the formula for a restructuring in Europe is the same as the US - control cash, adjust pricing, renegotiate contracts, reduce employees, eliminate poorly performing divisions or products, accelerate collection efforts and restructure the balance sheet. In practice, implementing those actions in Europe can seem like an impossible dream. Too often, European management or advisors will raise an unending series of roadblocks and reasons as to why they cannot implement change. To complicate matters, when they do decide to act, they often lack the urgency demanded by the deteriorating situation. A half-hearted or botched attempt at a turnaround can further cripple the business, alienate customers and demoralize employees. To create lasting change in a distressed potranseuropean business, turnaround efforts must go beyond goal setting and...
Read more

European Patents and International PCT Patents - Further Cost Savings

  There are a number of easy ways to significantly reduce your European patent application costs, both when filing directly at the European Patent Office ('EPO') from a domestic patent filing or when entering the European Regional Phase from an international patent application ('PCT') at 31 months from the earliest priority date. Occasionally, we are presented with a European patent specification or an international patent specification having a large number of pages, which on more than one occasion has been over one hundred. As we know, each page in excess of the first 35 pages incurs an 'excess page' official fee, which at present is €13 Euros. These 'excess page' fees can therefore soon mount up. So, the question is, how can we limit these 'excess page' fees when filing European patent applications or international PCT patent applications? Taking the European patent application first, the specification can obviously be formatted if directly fi...
Read more