• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>International and Comparative Law Quarterly >BLANKET BANS, SUBSIDIARITY, AND THE PROCEDURAL TURN OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS
【24h】

BLANKET BANS, SUBSIDIARITY, AND THE PROCEDURAL TURN OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS

机译：毯子禁令，附属机构和欧洲人权法庭的程序转向

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In recent years several commentators have identified a ‘procedural turn’ by the European Court of Human Rights whereby it places increased emphasis on the presence or absence and/or quality of legislative and judicial deliberations at domestic level when assessing the proportionality of allegedly rights-infringing measures. One area where the procedural turn has been particularly apparent is in relation to cases involving blanket bans on activities protected by the European Convention. On most accounts this move to ‘process-based review’ is causally linked to the principle of subsidiarity. In this article it is argued that whilst the shift to process-based review may generally have sound justifications in terms of the subsidiary role of the European Court as compared to States parties to the Convention, there are nevertheless several ironic downsides to this approach in the case of blanket bans, in terms of the certainty and predictability of the Court's case law. Furthermore, and more critically, there may be serious consequences in terms of the rights protection afforded to vulnerable minorities within States who may be at the receiving end of such legislative blanket bans.
机译：近年来，若干评论员通过欧洲人权法院确定了“程序扭转”，在评估涉嫌权利的比例时，它会增加立法和司法审议的存在或缺席和/或质量措施。程序转弯特别明显的一个领域与涉及橡塑禁止受欧洲公约保护的活动的案件有关。大多数账户，这搬迁到“基于过程的审查”是因属性原则的因果关系。在本文中，据称，虽然基于过程的审查的转变可能就欧洲法院的子公司作用而言，与“公约”缔约国相比，但仍有几个讽刺缺陷在这种方法中毯子禁令的情况，就法院案例法的确定性和可预测性而言。此外，更为严重的是，在可能在此类立法毯禁令的收到粮食局部的弱势群体提供的权利保护方面可能存在严重后果。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号