Jump to content

Kotun 'Yancin Dan Adam ta Turai

Daga Wikipedia, Insakulofidiya ta kyauta.

 

Fayil:European Court of Human Rights.jpg
Ginin Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai

Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai (ECtHR), wanda aka fi sani da Kotun Strasbourg, Kotun kasa da kasa ce ta Majalisar Turai wacce ke fassara Yarjejeniyar Turai kan ''Yancin ɗan adam (ECHR). Kotun ta saurari aikace-aikacen da ke zargin cewa jihar da ke da kwangila ta karya ɗaya ko fiye daga cikin haƙƙin ɗan adam da aka lissafa a cikin yarjejeniyar ko kuma ƙa'idodinta na zaɓi wanda ƙasa memba ce. Kotun tana zaune ne a Strasbourg, Faransa.

An kafa kotun a cikin 1959 kuma ta yanke hukuncin shari'arta ta farko a cikin 1960 a Lawless v. Ireland. Ana iya shigar da aikace-aikacen ta mutum ɗaya, ƙungiyar mutane, ko ɗaya ko fiye na sauran jihohin masu kwangila. Baya ga hukunce-hukunce, kotu kuma na iya bayar da shawarwarin shawarwari. An amince da taron ne a cikin mahallin Majalisar Turai, kuma dukkanin kasashe mambobinta 46 ne ke ba da kwangilar shiga taron. Hanyar farko ta kotu na fassarar shari'a ita ce koyarwar kayan aiki mai rai, ma'ana ana fassara Yarjejeniyar ta la'akari da yanayin yau.

Masana shari'ar kasa da kasa suna la'akari da ECtHR a matsayin kotun kare hakkin dan adam ta kasa da kasa mafi inganci a duniya.[1][2] Duk da haka, kotun ta fuskanci kalubale tare da hukunce-hukuncen da bangarorin kwangila ba su aiwatar da su ba.

Tarihi da tsari

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]
Wani bangare na Ginin Berlin a gaban Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai

A ranar 10 ga watan Disamban shekara ta 1948, Majalisar Dinkin Duniya ta amince da yarjejeniyar kare hakkin bil'adama ta duniya, wadda ke da nufin karfafa amincewa da hakkokin bil'adama a duniya da aka gindaya a ciki, domin karfafa kare hakkin bil'adama a matakin kasa da kasa. Duk da yake yana da matukar mahimmanci wajen kafa ma'auni na duniya a karon farko, sanarwar ta kasance mai buri, kuma ba ta da hanyar aiwatar da shari'a. A cikin 1949, kasashe goma sha biyu na sabuwar Majalisar Turai da aka kirkiro sun fara aiki a kan Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam, suna yin wahayi daga haƙƙoƙin da aka riga aka tsara a cikin sanarwar, amma tare da muhimmiyar bambanci - ga ƙasashen Turai waɗanda suka zaɓi shiga cikinta - za a sami tsarin shari'a don tabbatar da cewa sun mutunta haƙƙin 'yan ƙasa.

An kafa kotun ne a ranar 21 ga watan Janairun 1959 bisa ga Mataki na 19 na Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam lokacin da Majalisar Dokokin Majalisar Turai ta zaba mambobinta na farko. Da farko, Hukumar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai ta hana shiga kotun, wanda aka soke a shekarar 1998. [3][4] Kotun ta kasance mai ƙarancin bayani a cikin shekaru na farko kuma ba ta tara doka mai yawa ba, ta fara samun keta doka a Neumeister da Austria (1968). Yarjejeniyar ta caje kotun da tabbatar da kiyaye aikin da jihohin kwangila suka yi dangane da yarjejeniyar da ka'idodinta, wanda ke tabbatar da tilasta aiwatar da Yarjejeniyar Turai a cikin kasashe membobin Majalisar Turai.

A matsayin kotun Majalisar Turai

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai, wacce ke tilasta Yarjejeniyar Turai kan ''Yancin ɗan adam, ita ce sananniyar hukumar . Majalisar Turai (CoE) (Faransanci: Conseil de l'Europe, CdE) kungiya ce ta kasa da kasa da aka kafa bayan yakin duniya na biyu don tabbatar da haƙƙin ɗan adam, Dimokuradiyya da mulkin doka a Turai. An kafa shi a 1949, yanzu yana da kasashe mambobi 46, yana rufe yawan jama'a kusan miliyan 700, kuma yana aiki tare da kasafin kuɗi na shekara-shekara na kusan Yuro miliyan 500.

Kungiyar ta bambanta da kasashe 27 na Tarayyar Turai (EU), kodayake wani lokacin ana rikitar da ita, wani bangare saboda EU ta karɓi asalin tutar Turai da Majalisar Turai ta kirkira a 1955, da kuma taken Turai. Babu wata ƙasa da ta taɓa shiga EU ba tare da kasancewa cikin Majalisar Turai ba. Majalisar Turai mai lura ne na Majalisar Dinkin Duniya . [5]

Kasashen membobin

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]
Kasashen membobin Majalisar Turai. Bugu da kari, Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam (ECHR) ta shafi a Kosovo sakamakon shigar da ECHR a cikin gida.[6]

Ikon kotun ya sami amincewar har zuwa yau daga dukkan kasashe 46 na Majalisar Turai. A ranar 1 ga Nuwamba 1998, kotun ta zama cibiyar cikakken lokaci kuma Hukumar Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai, wacce ke amfani da ita don yanke shawara kan yarda da aikace-aikace, an soke ta Yarjejeniyar 11.[7]

Haɗin sabbin jihohi zuwa Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam bayan faduwar Ginin Berlin a 1989 ya haifar da karuwar aikace-aikacen da aka gabatar a kotun. An yi barazanar ingancin kotun sosai ta hanyar tarin aikace-aikacen da ke jira.

A cikin 1999, an ware aikace-aikace 8,400 don saurare. A cikin 2003, an shigar da kararraki 27,200 kuma adadin da ke jiran ya kai kusan 65,000. A shekara ta 2005, kotu ta buɗe fayilolin shari'a 45,500. A cikin 2009, an ware aikace-aikacen 57,200, tare da 119,300 masu jiran gado. A lokacin, an bayyana fiye da kashi 90 cikin 100 na aikace-aikacen da ba za a amince da su ba, kuma yawancin shari'o'in sun yanke shawarar-kusan kashi 60 cikin 100 na hukuncin da kotun ta yanke - da suka shafi abin da ake kira maimaita lokuta: inda kotu ta riga ta yanke hukuncin gano cin zarafin Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam ko kuma inda aka kafa dokar shari'a a kan irin wannan shari'ar.

An tsara Yarjejeniyar 11 don magance matsalolin shari'o'in da ke jiran ta hanyar kafa kotun da alƙalai a matsayin ma'aikata na cikakken lokaci, ta hanyar sauƙaƙe hanya da rage tsawon ayyukan. Koyaya, yayin da aikin kotun ya ci gaba da ƙaruwa, jihohin kwangila sun amince da cewa ƙarin gyare-gyare sun zama dole kuma a watan Mayu na shekara ta 2004, Kwamitin Ministocin Majalisar Turai ya karɓi Yarjejeniyar 14 ga Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam.[8] An tsara Yarjejeniyar 14 tare da manufar rage nauyin aiki na kotun da na Kwamitin Ministocin Majalisar Turai, wanda ke kula da aiwatar da hukunce-hukunce, don kotun ta iya mayar da hankali kan shari'o'in da ke tayar da muhimman batutuwan kare hakkin dan adam.[9]

Alƙalai

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]
Kotun Kotun Turai ta 'Yancin Dan Adam

Ana zabar alƙalai don wa'adin shekaru tara da ba za a iya sabuntawa ba.[9] Adadin alƙalai na cikakken lokaci da ke zaune a kotun daidai yake da yawan jihohin kwangila ga Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam, a halin yanzu 46. Yarjejeniyar ta buƙaci alƙalai su kasance masu "babban halin kirki" kuma suna da ƙwarewar da ta dace da babban mukamin shari'a, ko kuma su zama lauyoyi masu ƙwarewa.

Kowane alƙali ana zabarsa ta hanyar kuri'un da suka fi yawa a Majalisar Dokokin Majalisar Turai daga cikin 'yan takara uku da kowace jiha mai kwangila ta zaba.[10] Ana zabar alƙalai a duk lokacin da wa'adin alƙali mai zama ya ƙare ko kuma lokacin da sabuwar jiha ta shiga taron. Shekarar ritaya na alƙalai shine 70, amma suna iya ci gaba da aiki a matsayin alƙalai har sai an zabi sabon alƙali ko har sai shari'o'in da suke zaune sun ƙare.

Alkalai suna gudanar da ayyukansu a matsayin mutum daya kuma an hana su samun wata alaka ko wata alaka da kasar da aka zabe su. Don tabbatar da 'yancin kai na kotu, ba a ba da izinin alkalai su shiga ayyukan da za su iya kawo cikas ga 'yancin kai na kotun ba. Alƙalai ba za su iya saurare ko yanke hukunci ba idan suna da alaƙa ta dangi ko ta sana'a da wata ƙungiya. Za a iya korar alkali daga aiki ne kawai idan sauran alkalan suka yanke hukunci, da kashi biyu bisa uku, cewa alkalin ya daina cika sharuddan da ake bukata. Alkalai suna jin dadin zaman alkalai, gata da kuma kariya da aka tanadar a cikin sashe na 40 na dokar Majalisar Turai.

Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai tana samun taimako ta hanyar rajista wanda ya kunshi kusan jami'ai 640, wanda kasa da rabin lauyoyi suka kasu kashi 31. Rijistar tana gudanar da aikin shiri ga alƙalai, kuma tana aiwatar da ayyukan sadarwa na kotun, tare da masu nema, jama'a da manema labarai. Kotun Plenary ce ke zabar mai rejista da mataimakin mai rejista.

Kotun da kuma gudanarwa

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kotun cikakke taro ne na dukkan alƙalai na kotun. Ba shi da aikin shari'a. Tana zabar shugaban kotun, mataimakin shugaban, mai rejista da mataimakin mai rejista. Har ila yau, yana hulɗa da al'amuran gudanarwa, horo, hanyoyin aiki, gyare-gyare, kafa Chambers da kuma karɓar Dokokin Kotun.

Shugaban kotun, mataimakan shugaban kasa guda biyu (suma shugabanin sashe) da sauran shugabannin sashe uku ne Kotun Daukaka Kara ke zabar su, Kotun koli ta ke zabar shugabannin sashe, tsarin da ya kunshi zababbun alkalan kotun 46. Wa'adin masu riƙon na tsawon shekaru uku ne. Sun shahara saboda ɗabi'a da iyawa. Dole ne su kasance masu zaman kansu kuma akwai rashin jituwa tare da wasu ayyuka. Ba za a iya soke su ta hanyar asalinsu ba, amma kawai ta hanyar yanke shawara na takwarorinsu, wanda kashi biyu bisa uku na rinjaye suka dauka kuma saboda manyan dalilai.

Ikon iko

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kotun tana da iko tsakanin kasashe membobin Majalisar Turai wanda ya haɗa da kusan kowace ƙasa a Turai ban da Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Rasha da Vatican City. Ikon kotun gabaɗaya an raba shi zuwa shari'o'i tsakanin jihohi, aikace-aikacen da mutane ke yi game da jihohin kwangila, da ra'ayoyin ba da shawara bisa ga Yarjejeniyar No.2. Aikace-aikacen da mutane suka yi sun zama mafi yawan shari'o'in da kotun ta ji. Kwamitin ya kunshi alƙalai uku, ɗakunan alƙalai bakwai, da Babban ɗaki na alƙalai 17.[11]

Aikace-aikacen mutane

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kowane mutum, kungiya mai zaman kanta, ko kuma rukuni na mutane na iya yin aikace-aikacen da mutane ke yi game da aikace-aikace na mutane game da jihohin kwangila, suna zargin cewa jihar ta keta hakkinsu a karkashin Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam. Kodayake harsunan hukuma na kotun sune Turanci da Faransanci, ana iya gabatar da aikace-aikacen a kowane ɗayan harsunan gwamnati na jihohin kwangila. Dole ne a yi aikace-aikacen a rubuce kuma mai nema ko wakilin mai nema ya sanya hannu.

Da zarar an yi rajista tare da kotu, an ba da shari'ar ga Alkalin Rapporteur, wanda zai iya yanke hukunci na ƙarshe akan ko ba a yarda da shari'ar ba. Ba za a iya yarda da shari'ar ba yayin da bai dace da buƙatun ra'ayi ba, ɗan gajeren lokaci ko ra'ayi na mutum, ko kuma idan ba za a iya ci gaba da shari'ar bisa dalilai na yau da kullun ba, kamar rashin gajiyar magunguna na cikin gida, ƙarewar watanni huɗu daga yanke shawara na ƙarshe na cikin gida da aka koka game da, rashin sanin suna, ko an riga an gabatar da wani muhimmin al'amari tare da wani bincike na ƙasa da ƙasa.

Idan Alkalin Rapporteur ya yanke hukuncin cewa za a iya ci gaba da shari’ar, sai a mika shari’ar zuwa wani zauren kotun, wanda sai dai idan ta ce ba za a amince da bukatar ba, sai ta mika karar ga gwamnatin jihar da aka shigar da karar, inda ta nemi gwamnati ta gabatar da abin da ta lura a kan lamarin.

Sa’an nan ne zauren kotun ya yi nazari tare da yanke hukunci kan yadda shari’ar ta amince da ita da kuma cancantar ta. Za a iya sauraron shari'o'in da ke tayar da tambayoyi masu tsanani na fassarar da kuma amfani da Yarjejeniyar Turai game da 'Yancin Dan Adam, batu mai mahimmanci na gaba ɗaya, ko kuma wanda zai iya fita daga shari'ar da ta gabata a cikin babban ɗakin shari'a idan duk bangarorin da ke cikin shari'ar sun amince da zauren kotun ya ba da izini ga Babban Chamber. Kwamitin alkalai biyar ne ke yanke hukunci ko Grand Chamber ta amince da batun.[9]

Shari'o'in da suka shafi jihohi

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Duk wata jiha mai kwangila ga Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam na iya kai karar wata jiha ta kwangila a kotun saboda zargin keta yarjejeniyar, kodayake a aikace wannan yana da wuya sosai. Ya zuwa 2021, kotun ta yanke hukunci kan shari'o'i biyar tsakanin jihohi: [12]

  • Ireland v. United Kingdom (no. 5310/71), hukunci na 18 Janairu 1978 game da rashin mutunci da wulakanci a Arewacin Ireland (mataki na 3)
  • Denmark v. Turkiyya (no. 34382/97), hukunci na 5 ga Afrilu 2000 da ke tabbatar da yarjejeniyar abokantaka ta DKK 450,000 game da dan kasar Denmark da aka tsare a Turkiyya (mataki na 3)
  • Cyprus v. Turkey (IV) (no. 25781/94), hukunce-hukuncen 10 ga Mayu 2001 game da kula da mutanen da suka ɓace (mataki na 2, 3 da 5), haƙƙin dawowar Helenawa waɗanda suka gudu zuwa kudu (mataki ya 8, 13 da P1-1), haƙƙin Helenawa har yanzu suna zaune a arewa (mataki nke 3, 8, 9, 10, 13, P1-1, P1-2) da kuma kotunan soja (mataki. Wani hukunci na gaba na 12 ga Mayu 2014 ya ba da Yuro miliyan 90 a cikin 'gaskiya kawai' (mataki na 41)  
  • Georgia v. Tarayyar Rasha (I) (no. 13255/07), hukunci na 3 ga Yulin 2014 game da fitar da Georgians daga Rasha (mataki na 3, 5, 13, 38, P4-4) da Rasha ba tare da hadin kai da kotun ba (mataki 38)
  • Georgia v. Tarayyar Rasha (II) (no. 38263/08), hukunci na 21 Janairu 2021

Ra'ayi mai ba da shawara

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kwamitin Ministoci na iya, ta hanyar kuri'un da suka fi yawa, ya nemi kotun ta ba da shawara game da fassarar Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam, sai dai idan lamarin ya danganta da abun ciki da kuma girman' yancin da kotun ta riga ta yi la'akari da su. Tun daga shekara ta 2018, jihohin membobin na iya neman ra'ayoyin shawarwari game da tambayoyin ka'idoji game da fassarar ko aikace-aikacen Yarjejeniyar, bisa ga Yarjejeniyar No. 16.[13] Wannan tsarin yana da niyyar inganta tattaunawa tsakanin kotunan kasa da ECtHR, ta haka ne ya hana keta yarjejeniyar da kuma rage nauyin wannan.[14] Ba kamar nassoshi na farko a ƙarƙashin dokar EU ba, ra'ayoyin ba da shawara na iya neman su ne kawai ta hanyar "babban kotuna da kotuna" na ƙasa memba. Kodayake Mataki na 5 na Yarjejeniyar No. 16 ya bayyana cewa "Ra'ayoyin ba za su kasance masu ɗaurewa ba", duk da haka sun shiga dokar shari'ar ECtHR kuma ana iya aiwatar da su ta hanyar korafe-korafe na mutum daga baya idan an keta su.

Sakamakon Erga omnes

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Hukunce-hukuncen ECtHR suna da tasirin omnes (wato, suna da yuwuwar yin aiki a kan dukkan ƙasashe membobinsu), saboda kotun "tana yanke hukunci kan batutuwan da suka shafi manufofin jama'a a cikin maslaha ta gama gari, ta yadda za a tsawaita ikon haƙƙin ɗan adam a cikin al'ummar ƙasashen Yarjejeniyar Turai", kodayake tasirin omnes "Ba a ɗaukar dukkan Jam'iyyun Jihohi a matsayin wata doka ta doka".[15]

Hanyar da yanke shawara

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

 

Shafin da ke nuna yadda shari'o'in ke ci gaba ta Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai
Babban Kotun Turai na 'Yancin Dan Adam

Bayan binciken farko na shigar da kara kotu ta duba lamarin ta hanyar sauraron wakilcin bangarorin biyu. Kotun na iya gudanar da duk wani bincike da ta ga ya dace a kan gaskiya ko batutuwan da aka taso a cikin aikace-aikacen kuma ana buƙatar jihohin da ke kwangila don ba wa kotun duk taimakon da ya dace don wannan dalili.

Yarjejeniyar Turai kan Haƙƙin Dan Adam na buƙatar duk wasu kararraki su kasance a cikin jama'a, sai dai idan akwai wasu yanayi na musamman da ke tabbatar da gudanar da zaman na sirri. A aikace ana sauraron yawancin shari'o'in a cikin sirri bayan rubuta roko. A cikin shari'ar sirri kotu na iya taimakawa duka bangarorin biyu wajen samun sulhu, inda kotun ta sa ido kan yadda yarjejeniyar ta kasance tare da yarjejeniyar. Duk da haka, a yawancin lokuta, ba a gudanar da sauraren karar.

Hukuncin Babban Majalisar na karshe ne. Hukunce-hukuncen da kotun ta yanke sun zama na karshe watanni uku bayan an bayar da su, sai dai idan an yi magana game da Babban Kotun don sake dubawa ko daukaka kara. Idan kwamitin Babban Majalisar ya ki amincewa da bukatar turawa, hukuncin majalisar kotun ya zama na karshe. Babban Majalisar ta kunshi alƙalai 17: shugaban kotun da mataimakan shugabanni, shugabannin sashi da alƙali na ƙasa, tare da sauran alƙalai da aka zaba ta hanyar jefa kuri'a. Grand Chambers sun haɗa da sauraron jama'a, wanda aka watsa shi azaman watsa shirye-shiryen yanar gizo a shafin yanar gizon ECHR.[16] Bayan sauraron jama'a, alƙalai suna yin shawarwari.

Hukunce-hukuncen kotun jama'a ne kuma dole ne su ƙunshi dalilan da ke tabbatar da hukuncin. Mataki na 46 na yarjejeniyar ya tanadi cewa jihohin da ke kwantiragi sun dauki alkawarin yin biyayya ga hukuncin karshe na kotu. A gefe guda, ra'ayoyin shawarwari, bisa ga ma'anar, ba su da ɗauri. Kotun ya zuwa yau ta yanke hukunci akai-akai cewa a karkashin yarjejeniyar ba ta da hurumin soke dokokin cikin gida ko ayyukan gudanarwa da suka saba wa yarjejeniyar.

Hukuncin kotun na jama'a ne kuma dole ne ya ƙunshi dalilai da ke tabbatar da shawarar. Mataki na 46 na yarjejeniyar ya ba da cewa jihohin kwangila sun yi biyayya da hukuncin karshe na kotun. A gefe guda, ra'ayoyin masu ba da shawara, ta hanyar ma'anar, ba su da ɗaurewa. Kotun ta yanke shawarar cewa a karkashin yarjejeniyar ba ta da ikon soke dokokin cikin gida ko ayyukan gudanarwa waɗanda suka saba wa yarjejeniyar.

Ana tuhumar kwamitin ministocin Majalisar Tarayyar Turai da sa ido kan yadda ake aiwatar da hukuncin kotun. Kwamitin Ministoci ne ke sa ido kan sauye-sauyen da jihohin da ke ba da kwangila suka yi wa dokokin kasarsu domin ya dace da babban taron, ko kuma matakan daidaikun mutane da kasar da ke kwantiragin ke dauka don gyara wasu laifuka. Hukunce-hukuncen da kotu ta yanke na daure kan jihohin da abin ya shafa kuma jihohi sukan bi hukuncin kotun.

Majalisa suna yanke hukunci da rinjaye. Duk wani alkali da ya saurari karar zai iya danganta wa hukuncin wani ra'ayi na daban. Wannan ra'ayi na iya dacewa ko rashin yarda da hukuncin da kotu ta yanke. Idan aka yi kunnen doki a kada kuri'a, shugaban kasa ne ke da kuri'ar jefa kuri'a.

Rashin amfani da magunguna na cikin gida

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 35 na Yarjejeniyar Turai game da Haƙƙin Dan Adam ya kafa a matsayin sharadi kan mika kai ga kotun Turai ta kare hakkin bil adama, gajiyar magunguna a cikin gida. Wannan sharadi ya faru ne sakamakon hurumin kotun kasa da kasa, da ke sa ido kan yadda ake aiwatar da yarjejeniyar da kuma neman kawar da take hakkin dan Adam. Dole ne mai nema ya tabbatar da gazawar kotunan ƙasa don magance matsalar, ta hanyar yin amfani da ingantattun magunguna masu inganci da isassun magunguna, da kuma zargin keta yarjejeniyar.

Matakan wucin gadi

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Dokar 39 ta Dokokin Kotun ta ba da izinin ECtHR ta "bayyana wa bangarorin duk wani mataki na wucin gadi wanda suka yi la'akari da ya kamata a karbe shi don amfanin bangarorin ko kuma a gudanar da aikin da ya dace. " [17] Matakan wucin rai suna da ɗaurewa kuma suna ba masu shari'a kariya ta wucin da sauri, kodayake ECtHR ya zaɓi kawai sanya su a cikin shari'o'i game da haɗari mai zuwa ga rayuwa da ga hannu. Sau da yawa ana amfani da irin waɗannan matakan don hana fitarwa ko fitarwa zuwa ƙasashe da ba su da isasshen tabbacin haƙƙin ɗan adam, yayin da buƙatun hana yiwuwar lalacewar wallafe-wallafen ko kwace dukiya ba sa haifar da irin wannan martani.

Farin Ciki ne kawai

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kotun na iya ba da kuɗin kuɗi ko lalacewa da ba ta kuɗi ba, wanda ake kira " gamsuwa kawai". Kyaututtukan yawanci ƙananan ne idan aka kwatanta da hukunce-hukuncen kotunan ƙasa kuma da wuya su wuce £ 1,000 tare da farashin shari'a. Lalacewar da ba ta kudi ba ta da alaƙa da abin da jihar za ta iya biya fiye da takamaiman lahani da mai shigar da kara ya sha. A wasu lokuta, maimaita alamu na keta haƙƙin ɗan adam yana haifar da kyaututtuka mafi girma a ƙoƙarin hukunta jihar da ke da alhakin, amma abin mamaki a wasu lokuta suna haifar da kyaututtukan da suka fi ƙanƙanta, ko kuma an buga shari'o'in gaba ɗaya.[18][19]

Fassarar shari'a

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Hanyar farko ta kotun Fassarar shari'a ita ce koyarwar kayan aiki masu rai, ma'ana cewa rubutu Yarjejeniyar "ya kamata a fassara shi cikin hasken yanayin yau" maimakon niyyar masu tsara shi.[20] A cikin Mamatkulov da Askarov v. Turkiyya (2008), kotun ta jaddada cewa "tana riƙe da haƙƙin mutum a matsayin mai amfani da tasiri, maimakon kariya ta ka'idoji da ta makirci".[21] Wani muhimmin bangare na fassarar Kotun shine Yarjejeniyar Vienna ta 1969 kan Dokar Yarjejeniya. [22]

Ɗaya daga cikin yankunan da koyarwar kayan aiki mai rai ta canza ka'idar ECtHR a tsawon lokaci shine game da bambancin bambanci wanda ya dogara da kabilanci, jinsi, addini, ko yanayin Jima'i, wanda ke da ƙaruwa da yiwuwar lakafta nuna bambanci mara kyau.[23][24] Bugu da kari, tare da yaduwar madadin shirye-shiryen iyali, kotun ta fadada ma'anar iyali a karkashin Mataki na 8, misali ga ma'aurata masu jinsi guda, kamar yadda a cikin Oliari da Sauran v Italiya (2015).[25] Kodayake masu karewa suna jayayya cewa koyarwar kayan aiki mai rai ya zama dole don kotun ta kasance mai dacewa da hukunce-hukuncen ta don daidaitawa da ainihin yanayin, irin waɗannan fassarorin ana kiransu wuce gona da iri ko gwagwarmayar shari'a ta masu sukar.

Yankin godiya

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kotun tana amfani da koyarwar gefen godiya, tana nufin haƙƙin jihohin membobin don saita ƙa'idodin ɗabi'a a cikin dalili. A tsawon lokaci, kotun ta rage iyakar godiya (har zuwa, a cewar wasu masu sharhi, na "matsalolin" na iyakar godiya). [26] Ƙuntataccen ra'ayi shine manufa ta zargi ga waɗanda suka yi imanin cewa ECtHR ya kamata ya rage rawar da ta taka, musamman daga Ƙasar Ingila.[27]

Masu fafutukar ganin an fi samun karbuwa ta fuskar yabo sun yi nuni da ra'ayoyin gida na 'yancin dan adam, musamman ga mahallin kowace kasa da al'adunta, da kuma hadarin zartar da hukunce-hukuncen da ba su dace da al'adu da tushe na gida ba. Masu sukar suna jayayya cewa ka'idar "tabbatacciyar yarjejeniya" na kasashe mambobin da ECtHR ke aiki a kansu yana da kuskure sosai, saboda irin wannan yarjejeniya sau da yawa yana dogara ne akan abubuwan da ke faruwa, kuma a tarihi a lokuta da yawa ra'ayi na zamantakewa da siyasa an sake yarda da cewa an yi kuskure.[28]

Ana zargin irin wannan hanyar da yin barazanar nuna bambanci da tilasta wa 'yan kasashe masu adawa, suna ƙarfafa tunanin kunshe. Bugu da ƙari, masu sukar suna jayayya cewa EHtCR ta yi iƙirarin cewa irin wannan yarjejeniya ta wanzu ko da a zahiri ba ta wanzu ba, saboda aikin shari'a na alƙalai.[28] An ce ta hanyar rashin bayyana yadda aka cimma yarjejeniya ya rage halattacciyar doka. Bugu da ƙari, yayin da ECtHR ke girma, yarjejeniya tsakanin membobin tana raguwa.[29]

Sai dai kuma, bangaren koyarwar yabo ya kuma fuskanci kakkausar suka daga masana fikihu da masana da suka ce hakan na gurgunta yanayin hakin dan Adam a duniya.[27]

Binciken daidaito

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Binciken daidaito yana jagorantar yawancin shari'ar Kotun. Tabbacin Mataki na ECHR 8, 9, 10, da 11 suna ƙarƙashin duk wani iyaka da zai iya zama "mahimmanci a cikin al'umma ta dimokuradiyya", yana ambaton abubuwan da suka haɗa da tsaron ƙasa, tsaron jama'a, kiwon lafiya da ɗabi'a, da haƙƙoƙi da 'yanci na wasu. Irin waɗannan yanayi suna buƙatar daidaita haƙƙin mutum da abubuwan da ke cikin al'umma, kamar yadda aka fara bayyana a cikin Belgian Linguistic Case (No. 2) . Masu sukar sun ci gaba da cewa daidaito yana haifar da hukunce-hukunce masu mahimmanci: abubuwan da alƙali ke so da imani na iya canza ra'ayinsu game da muhimmancin haƙƙin. Kotun ta kafa wasu ka'idoji don tabbatar da daidaito a duk irin waɗannan yanke shawara, amma waɗannan jagororin sun rufe karamin ɓangare na dokar shari'arta.

Dangantaka da sauran kotuna

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kotun Turai

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kotun Shari'a ta Tarayyar Turai (CJEU) ba ta da alaƙa da Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai: kotuna biyu suna da alaƙa le kungiyoyi daban-daban. Koyaya, tunda duk Jihohin EU mambobi ne na Majalisar Turai kuma haka kuma bangarorin Yarjejeniyar 'Yancin Dan Adam, akwai damuwa game da daidaito a cikin shari'ar shari'a tsakanin kotuna biyu. CJEU tana nufin dokar shari'a ta Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai kuma tana bi da Yarjejeniyar Kare Hakkin dan Adam kamar dai wani bangare ne na tsarin shari'a na EU [30] tunda ya zama wani bangare na ka'idodin shari'a ga kasashe membobin EU.

Duk da cewa kasashe mambobinta ne ke cikin taron, ita kanta kungiyar Tarayyar Turai ba jam’iyya ba ce, domin ba ta da ikon zama daya a wasu yarjejeniyoyin da suka gabata. Duk da haka, hukumomin EU suna daure a ƙarƙashin doka ta 6 na yarjejeniyar Nice EU don mutunta haƙƙin ɗan adam a ƙarƙashin yarjejeniyar. Bugu da ƙari, tun lokacin da yarjejeniyar Lisbon ta fara aiki a ranar 1 ga Disamba 2009, ana sa ran EU za ta rattaba hannu kan yarjejeniyar. Hakan na nufin kotun ta na daure da ka’idojin shari’a na shari’ar kotunan ‘yancin dan Adam don haka tana karkashin dokokinta na ‘yancin dan Adam, wanda hakan zai kaucewa batutuwan da suka shafi shari’ar da ke cin karo da juna a tsakanin wadannan kotuna biyu. A cikin Disamba 2014, CJEU ta fitar da Ra'ayi 2/13 na ƙin shiga cikin Yarjejeniyar.[ana buƙatar hujja]

Duk da gazawar Tarayyar Turai don shiga Yarjejeniyar, ECtHR ta ci gaba da riƙe cewa kasashe membobin suna da tabbacin ECHR ko da lokacin aiwatar da aiwatar da dokar EU. Duk da haka, a lokaci guda Kotun ta nemi inganta hadin gwiwar kasa da kasa da kuma kaucewa tsoma baki a cikin harkokin Tarayyar Turai. Ya daidaita maƙasudai masu cin karo da juna na haɓaka haɗin kai na Turai da kuma guje wa da'awar ECHR ta hanyar "Tsarin Bosphorus", manufar ƙayyadaddun ƙa'idodin da aka bayyana a cikin Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Sirketi v Ireland. Domin CJEU tana wakiltar tsarin tabbatar da haƙƙin ɗan adam “mai kwatankwacin”, ECtHR na iya ɗaukan “jihar ba ta rabu da buƙatun Yarjejeniyar ba idan ba ta wuce aiwatar da haƙƙin doka da ke gudana daga membobinta [EU] ba". "[31] Ana iya karyata wannan zato a kowane yanayi inda kariya ta haƙƙin Yarjejeniya "a bayyane yake".

Kotunan kasa

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Yawancin bangarorin kwangila na Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam sun haɗa yarjejeniyar cikin tsarin shari'arsu na ƙasa, ko dai ta hanyar tanadin kundin tsarin mulki, doka ko yanke shawara na shari'a. Kotun Turai ta kara la'akari da tattaunawar shari'a tare da kotunan kasa a matsayin "babban fifiko", musamman idan ya zo ga aiwatar da hukunce-hukunce. Dangane da binciken da aka yi a shekarar 2012, Kotun Turai ta tabbatar da yanke shawara ta hanyar ambaton shari'arta don shawo kan kotunan kasa su yarda da hukunce-hukuncen ta.[32]

A cikin shekara ta 2015, Rasha ta amince da dokar da ta ayyana doka don soke hukunce-hukuncen daga ECtHR, wanda ya tsara hukuncin Kotun Tsarin Mulki na Rasha da ta gabata wanda ya yanke hukuncin cewa Rasha na iya ƙin amincewa da shawarar ECtHR idan ta sabawa Kundin Tsarin Mulki na Russia, [33] kuma a shekara ta 2020 Rasha ta yi gyare-gyaren kundin tsarin mulkin kasar wanda ya tanadi cewa kundin tsarin mulkin kasar ya zarce dokokin kasa da kasa. (A cikin Maris 2022, saboda mamayar da Rasha ta yi wa Ukraine da kuma tarihin rashin mutunta ka'idojin Yarjejeniyar, an kori Rasha daga Majalisar Turai.) Sauran ƙasashe kuma sun matsa don taƙaita yanayin dauri na hukunce-hukuncen ECtHR, bisa ga ƙa'idodin tsarin mulki na ƙasashen. A shekara ta 2004, Kotun Tsarin Mulki ta Tarayya ta Jamus ta yanke hukuncin cewa ba koyaushe ne hukunce-hukuncen da ECtHR ta yanke ba a kan kotunan Jamus.[34] Kotun Tsarin Mulki ta Italiya ta kuma ƙuntata aikace-aikacen yanke shawara na ECtHR.

Littafin 2016 ya nuna Austria, Belgium, Czechia, Jamus, Italiya, Poland, da Sweden don zama mafi yawan abokantaka ga hukunce-hukuncen ECtHR; Faransa, Hungary, Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland, da Turkiyya don zama masu sukar matsakaici; Ingila don zama masu matukar sukar; da Rasha don zama masu adawa a bayyane.[35] A cikin 2019, an yanke wa jihohin kudancin Caucasus hukunci a matsayin masu bin doka a cikin wani labarin bita na doka.[36]

Tasiri

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Masana shari'ar kasa da kasa suna la'akari da ECtHR a matsayin kotun kare hakkin dan adam ta kasa da kasa mafi inganci a duniya. [1] [2] A cewar Michael Goldhaber a cikin Tarihin Jama'a na Kotun Kare Hakkin Dan Adam ta Turai, "Masana koyaushe suna bayyana shi da maganganu masu girma". [37][38]

Aiwatarwa

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]
Yarda da duk hukuncin da ya dace na Kotun Turai na yancin ɗan adam kamar na 10 Maris 2017. A wannan kwanan wata, mafi tsufa ba a cika hukunci ba daga 1996.[39]
Aiwatar da manyan lamuran daga shekaru 10 da suka gabata har zuwa watan Agusta 2021. Babu aiwatarwa mai launin baki yayin aiwatarwa 100% fari ne. Matsakaicin aiwatarwa shine 53%, tare da mafi ƙarancin Azerbaijan (4%) da Rasha (10%) da Luxembourg mafi girma, Monaco, da Estonia (100%) da Czechia (96%). (Belarus ya bayyana fari a nan saboda an cire shi daga taswirar: ba ƙasa ba ce kuma ba ta aiwatar da hukunce-hukunce.) [40]

Kotun ba ta da ikon tilasta aiki. Wasu jihohi sun yi watsi da hukunce-hukuncen ECtHR kuma sun ci gaba da ayyukan da aka yanke musu hukunci a matsayin keta haƙƙin ɗan adam.[41][42] Kodayake duk lalacewar dole ne a biya mai nema a cikin lokacin da kotun ta ƙayyade (yawanci watanni uku) ko kuma zai tara riba, babu wani lokaci na ƙarshe don duk wani tsari mai rikitarwa da hukuncin ya buƙaci. Koyaya, ta hanyar barin hukunci ba tare da aiwatarwa ba na dogon lokaci, yana kawo tambaya game da jajircewar jihar don magance take hakkin dan adam a cikin lokaci.[39]

Adadin hukunce-hukuncen da ba a aiwatar da su ya tashi daga 2,624 a shekarar 2001 zuwa 9,944 a karshen shekarar 2016, kashi 48% daga cikinsu sun tafi ba tare da aiwatar da su ba shekaru biyar ko fiye. A cikin 2016, duk sai dai ɗaya daga cikin ƙasashe 47 na Majalisar Turai ba su aiwatar da aƙalla hukunci ɗaya na ECtHR a cikin lokaci ba, kodayake yawancin hukunce-hukuncen da ba a aiwatar da su ba sun shafi wasu ƙasashe kaɗan: Italiya (2,219), Rasha (1,540), Turkiyya (1,342), da Ukraine (1,172). Fiye da 3,200 da ba a aiwatar da hukunce-hukunce "sun damu da cin zarafi daga jami'an tsaro da kuma rashin kyawun tsare-tsare".

Kwamishinan Majalisar Turai na 'Yancin Dan Adam, Nils Muižnieks, ya bayyana cewa: "Aikinmu ya dogara ne akan hadin kai da bangaskiya mai kyau. Lokacin da ba ku da hakan, yana da matukar wahala a sami tasiri. "Muna da kayan aiki don taimakawa ƙasashen da ba sa son a taimaka musu. " Rasha ta yi watsi da hukunce-hukuncen ECtHR, tana biyan diyya a mafi yawan lokuta amma tana ƙin gyara matsalar, wanda ke haifar da adadi mai yawa na maimaita shari'o'i. Dokokin Rasha sun kafa takamaiman asusun don biyan masu shigar da kara a cikin hukuncin ECtHR.[18]

Shahararrun hukunce-hukuncen da ba a aiwatar da su ba sun haɗa da:

  • A cikin Hirst v. United Kingdom (2005), da kuma shari'o'i da yawa da suka biyo baya, kotun ta gano cewa hanawa 'yan fursunonin Burtaniya kada kuri'a ya saba wa Mataki na 3 na Yarjejeniyar 1, wanda ke tabbatar da' 'yancin jefa kuri'a'a. An aiwatar da ƙaramin sulhu a cikin 2017 . [43]
  • Kundin Tsarin Mulki na Bosnia da Herzegovina an fara yin mulki don nuna bambanci a cikin 2009 (Sejdić da Finci v. Bosnia da Hersegovina), don hana 'yan ƙasar Bosnia waɗanda ba na Bosniak, Croat, ko Serb ba daga zabar su zuwa wasu ofisoshin jihohi. Ya zuwa watan Disamba na shekara ta 2019, har yanzu ba a soke ko kuma a yi gyare-gyare game da tanadin nuna bambanci ba, duk da shari'o'i uku da suka biyo baya da suka tabbatar da rashin jituwa da Yarjejeniyar.[44]
  • A cikin Alekseyev v. Rasha (2010), an yanke hukuncin haramtacciyar Moscow Pride don keta 'yancin taro. A cikin 2012, kotunan Rasha sun haramta taron na shekaru 100 masu zuwa.[45][46][47] Kotun Turai ta tabbatar da hukuncin da ta yanke cewa haramtacciyar zanga-zangar girman kai ta keta 'yancin haƙƙin taro a cikin Alekseyev da Sauran v. Rasha (2018). [48]
  • Bayev and Others v. Russia (2017), dangane da dokar farfagandar gay ta Rasha da dokokin da suka shafi, wanda kotun ta yanke hukunci don rage 'yancin magana.[46]
  • Dan siyasar adawa na Azerbaijan Ilgar Mammadov, wanda aka tsare shi a kurkuku ta ECtHR ta yi mulki ba bisa ka'ida ba a shekarar 2014; ba a sake shi ba har zuwa 2018. Daga baya aka wanke shi kuma ya biya diyya.
  • Bayan 'Burmych da Sauran v. Ukraine (2017), Kotun Turai ta kori dukkan shari'o'i 12,143 bayan tsarin Ivanov v. Ukraine (2009) da kuma duk wani shari'a na gaba da ke bin wannan tsari, ta ba da su ga Ma'aikatar Zartarwa a Majalisar Turai don tilasta. Wadannan shari'o'in duk sun shafi masu korafin da ba a biya su kudi ba a karkashin dokar Ukraine.[18][49] A cikin shekaru takwas tsakanin Ivanov da Burmych, Ukraine ba ta yi ƙoƙari ta warware waɗannan shari'o'in ba, wanda ya jagoranci ECtHR don "bayar da" ƙoƙarin ƙarfafa Ukraine ta bi hukunce-hukuncen ta. "[18] Ya zuwa 2020, kuɗin da ake bin masu shigar da kara a cikin waɗannan shari'o'in ya kasance ba a biya shi ba.[18]

Wani batu kuma shine jinkirta aiwatar da hukunce-hukuncen.

Rashin shari'o'in da ke jiran ya sauka daga saman 151,600 a cikin 2011, a wani bangare saboda karkatar da aikace-aikacen a matakin yarda.

Yawan shari’o’in kotun ya fadada cikin sauri bayan faduwar Tarayyar Soviet, wanda ya karu daga kasa da 8,400 da aka shigar a shekara ta 1999 zuwa 57,000 a shekara ta 2009. Yawancin waɗannan shari’o’in sun shafi ’yan ƙasa na tsohuwar Ƙungiya ta Gabas inda ba a amince da tsarin kotun ba. A shekara ta 2009, kotun ta samu koma baya na shari'o'i 120,000 wanda zai bukaci shekaru 46 don aiwatarwa a daidai lokacin da ya gabata, wanda ya haifar da gyara. A cewar BBC, kotun ta fara "daga kanta a matsayin wanda aka azabtar da nasarar da ta samu".

Tsakanin 2007 da 2017, adadin shari'o'in da aka yi a kowace shekara ya kasance dawwama (tsakanin 1,280 da 1,550); kashi biyu bisa uku na shari'o'in sun kasance masu maimaitawa kuma sun fi damuwa da wasu ƙasashe: Turkiyya (2,401), Rasha (2,110), Romania (1,341), da Poland (1,272). Abubuwan da ake maimaitawa suna nuna yanayin take haƙƙin ɗan adam a wata ƙasa. Sanarwar Interlaken ta 2010 ta bayyana cewa kotun za ta rage yawan karar ta ta hanyar rage yawan adadin kararrakin da ta yi.[50]

A sakamakon gyare-gyare na Yarjejeniyar 14 don rage cajin shari'a, an ba da alƙalai guda ɗaya ikon ƙin aikace-aikacen da ba a yarda da su ba kuma an kirkiro tsarin "hukunce-hukuncen matukin jirgi" don magance shari'o'in maimaitawa ba tare da ganowa ba ga kowannensu.[51][52] Aikace-aikacen da ke jiran sun kai 151,600 a cikin 2011 kuma an rage su zuwa 59,800 ta hanyar 2019.

Wadannan gyare-gyare sun haifar da karuwar yawan aikace-aikacen da aka ayyana ba za a yarda da su ba ko kuma sun wuce hukunce-hukuncen a karkashin sabon tsarin matukin jirgi.[53] A cewar Steven Greer, "ba za a bincika yawancin aikace-aikace ba", kuma wannan halin ya cancanci a matsayin "ƙaryataccen tsari na adalci ga wasu nau'o'in masu neman cancanta waɗanda ba za a iya magance shari'arsu ba". Samun damar yin adalci na iya hana rashin taimakon shari'a da sauran dalilai.[54][55]

Tasirin

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Hukunce-hukuncen ECthHR sun faɗaɗa kare haƙƙin ɗan adam a kowace ƙasa da ta sa hannu. Fitattun haƙƙoƙin da aka tsare sun haɗa da:[56][57]

  • Mataki na 2: 'yancin rayuwa ciki har da kawar da hukuncin kisa, da kuma ingantaccen bincike game da mutuwar da aka tsare da kuma saboda tashin hankali na gida [58]
  • Mataki na 3: 'yanci daga azabtarwa da rashin kulawa, kawo karshen zalunci na' yan sanda da kuma yanayin da ba shi da kyau a cikin kurkuku, haramtacciyar tilastawa [3][59][60]
  • Mataki na 4: Shari'o'in Mataki na 4 sun haifar da aikata laifuka na tilasta aiki da fataucin mutane a kasashe da yawa [61]
  • Mataki na 5: 'yanci da tsaro, kamar kawo karshen tsare-tsare da yawa kafin a yi musu shari'a wanda ya haifar da mutane marasa laifi da aka daure su shekaru [62]
  • Mataki na 6: 'yancin shari'a mai adalci, gami da soke hukunci mara kyau, iyakance tsawon shari'ar shari'a don kauce wa jinkirin rashin adalci, da kuma tabbatar da rashin son kai na shari'a [63]
  • Mataki na 8: Hakkin sirri, wanda ya haɗa da iyakoki kan sauraron sauraro da kuma kawar da luwadi Hakkin rayuwar iyali, gami da kawo ƙarshen tsarin kula da yara wanda ke nuna bambanci ga maza, mutanen LGBT, da 'yan tsiraru na addini [13][14][15][16][17][18]
  • Mataki na 9: 'yancin lamiri da Addini ciki har da ƙin yarda da lamiri, haƙƙin neman tuba, nauyin da ba daidai ba akan yin addini, tsoma baki na gwamnati a cikin ƙungiyoyin addini [68][69]
  • Mataki na 10: kariya ga 'yancin faɗar albarkacin baki, gami da soke Dokokin ɓata suna da haramta bayyana ra'ayoyin da ba su dace ba ko kuma sanya hukunci mai yawa, kariya ga masu ba da labari da 'yan jarida waɗanda suka fallasa cin hanci da rashawa na siyasa ko kuma suka soki gwamnati [70][71]
  • Mataki na 11: 'yancin tarayya da Taron zaman lafiya, kamar haƙƙin shirya fareti na girman kai da zanga-zangar siyasa [72]
  • Mataki na 14 da Yarjejeniya ta 12: 'yancin daidaitawa, kamar yanke hukunci game da nau'ikan wariyar launin fata a kan Mutanen Romani [73][74]
  • Yarjejeniya ta 1, Mataki na 1: haƙƙin mallaka, gami da maido da dukiyar da jihar ta kwace ba bisa ka'ida ba da kuma diyya mai kyau don kwacewa [75][76]

Daraja da kyaututtuka

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

A shekara ta 2010, kotun ta karbi lambar yabo ta Freedom daga Cibiyar Roosevelt da ke New York.[77] A cikin 2020, gwamnatin Girka ta zabi kotun don Kyautar Nobel ta Zaman Lafiya.[78]

Dubi kuma

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Bayanan da aka ambata

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Haɗin waje

[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]
  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Helfer, L. R. (2008). "Redesigning the European Court of Human Rights: Embeddedness as a Deep Structural Principle of the European Human Rights Regime". European Journal of International Law. 19 (1): 125–159. doi:10.1093/ejil/chn004.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 Emmert, Frank; Carney, Chandler (2017). "The European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights vs. The Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms - A Comparison". Fordham International Law Journal (in Turanci). 40 (4).
  3. ↑ "The court in brief" (PDF). European Court of Human Rights. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09. Retrieved 11 February 2013.
  4. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Bates
  5. ↑ "Intergovernmental Organizations". www.un.org.
  6. ↑ Istrefi, Kushtrim (2018). "Kosovo's Quest for Council of Europe Membership". Review of Central and East European Law (in Turanci). 43 (3): 255–273. doi:10.1163/15730352-04303002. ISSN 1573-0352.
  7. ↑ "Details of Treaty No.155". Council of Europe. Retrieved 31 October 2017.
  8. ↑ Joint Committee on Human Rights (1 December 2004). "Protocol No. 14 to the European Convention on Human Rights" (PDF). p. 5. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09. Retrieved 9 June 2022.
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 "Protocol no.14 Factsheet: The reform of the European Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Council of Europe. May 2010. p. 1. Retrieved 25 September 2011.
  10. ↑ "Election of Judges to the European Court of Human Rights". Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
  11. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named essentials
  12. ↑ "Inter-States applications" (PDF). ECHR.coe.int. 2019. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
  13. ↑ Council of Europe (2013). "Protocol No. 16 to the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms".
  14. ↑ Paprocka, Ada; Ziółkowski, Michał (2015). "Advisory opinions under Protocol No. 16 to the European Convention on Human Rights". European Constitutional Law Review (in Turanci). 11 (2): 274–277. doi:10.1017/S1574019615000176. ISSN 1574-0196.
  15. ↑ Helfer, Laurence R.; Voeten, Erik (2014). "International Courts as Agents of Legal Change: Evidence from LGBT Rights in Europe". International Organization. 68 (1): 77–110. doi:10.1017/S0020818313000398. S2CID 232254690 Check |s2cid= value (help).
  16. ↑ "Webcasts of hearings - ECHR Hearings - ECHR - ECHR / CEDH". ECHR (in Turanci). Retrieved 2025-03-28.
  17. ↑ European Court of Human Rights (3 June 2022). "Rules of Court".
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 18.2 18.3 18.4 Fikfak, Veronika (2020). "Non-pecuniary damages before the European Court of Human Rights: Forget the victim; it's all about the state". Leiden Journal of International Law. 33 (2): 335–369. doi:10.1017/S0922156520000035.
  19. ↑ Fikfak, Veronika (2018). "Changing State Behaviour: Damages before the European Court of Human Rights". European Journal of International Law. 29 (4): 1091–1125. doi:10.1093/ejil/chy064.
  20. ↑ (Birgit ed.). Missing or empty |title= (help)
  21. ↑ Theil, Stefan (2017). "Is the 'Living Instrument' Approach of the European Court of Human Rights Compatible with the ECHR and International Law?". European Public Law. 23 (3): 587–614. doi:10.17863/CAM.8478. Archived from the original on 2023-04-06. Retrieved 2025-08-06.
  22. ↑ Mowbray, A. (2005). "The Creativity of the European Court of Human Rights". Human Rights Law Review. 5 (1): 57–79. doi:10.1093/hrlrev/ngi003.
  23. ↑ Danisi, C. (2011). "How far can the European Court of Human Rights go in the fight against discrimination? Defining new standards in its nondiscrimination jurisprudence". International Journal of Constitutional Law. 9 (3–4): 793–807. doi:10.1093/icon/mor044.
  24. ↑ de Waele, Henri; Vleuten, Anna van der (2011). "Judicial Activism in the European Court of Justice – The Case of LGBT Rights". Michigan State International Law Review. 19 (3): 639–. ISSN 2328-3068.
  25. ↑ Hamilton, Frances (2018). "The Case for Same-Sex Marriage Before the European Court of Human Rights" (PDF). Journal of Homosexuality. 65 (12): 1582–1606. doi:10.1080/00918369.2017.1380991. PMID 28949813. S2CID 27052577. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09.
  26. ↑ Gerards, Janneke (2018). "Margin of Appreciation and Incrementalism in the Case Law of the European Court of Human Rights". Human Rights Law Review. 18 (3): 495–515. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngy017.
  27. ↑ 27.0 27.1 McGoldrick, Dominic (2016). "A Defence of the Margin of Appreciation and an Argument for ITS Application by the Human Rights Committee". International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 65 (1): 21–60. doi:10.1017/S0020589315000457.
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Kleinlein, Thomas (13 November 2017). "Consensus and Contestability: The ECtHR and the Combined Potential of European Consensus and Procedural Rationality Control". European Journal of International Law. 28 (3): 871–893. doi:10.1093/ejil/chx055.
  29. ↑ Roffee, J. A. (2014). "No Consensus on Incest? Criminalisation and Compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights". Human Rights Law Review. 14 (3): 541–572. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngu023.
  30. ↑ "StackPath" (PDF). www.corteidh.or.cr. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09. Retrieved 2021-06-05.
  31. ↑ European Court of Human Rights. "Bosphorus Hava Yolları Turizm ve Ticaret Anonim Şirketi v. Ireland". HUDOC. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  32. ↑ Lupu, Yonatan; Voeten, Erik (2012). "Precedent in International Courts: A Network Analysis of Case Citations by the European Court of Human Rights". British Journal of Political Science. 42 (2): 413–439. doi:10.1017/S0007123411000433. ISSN 1469-2112. S2CID 14120365. Archived from the original on 20 August 2022. Retrieved 20 August 2022.
  33. ↑ "Russia may overrule European law". BBC News. 14 July 2015.
  34. ↑ Thorsten Ader (14 October 2004). "Germany: Binding Effect of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights". Council of Europe. Archived from the original on 15 October 2009. Retrieved 23 May 2019.
  35. ↑ (Sarah ed.). Missing or empty |title= (help)
  36. ↑ Remezaite, Ramute (2019). "Challenging the Unconditional: Partial Compliance with ECtHR Judgments in the South Caucasus States". Israel Law Review. 52 (2): 169–195. doi:10.1017/S0021223719000049. S2CID 210381634.
  37. ↑ Nelaeva, Galina A.; Khabarova, Elena A.; Sidorova, Natalia V. (2020). "Russia's Relations with the European Court of Human Rights in the Aftermath of the Markin Decision: Debating the "Backlash"". Human Rights Review. 21 (1): 93–112. doi:10.1007/s12142-019-00577-7.
  38. ↑ Fokas, Effie; Richardson, James T. (2017). "The European Court of Human Rights and minority religions: messages generated and messages received". Religion, State and Society. 45 (3–4): 166–173. doi:10.1080/09637494.2017.1399577. S2CID 148706667.
  39. ↑ 39.0 39.1 von Staden 2018.
  40. ↑ "Country Map". European Implementation Network. Retrieved 25 September 2021.
  41. ↑ (Dimitry ed.). Missing or empty |title= (help)
  42. ↑ Glas, Lize R. (2019). "The European Court of Human Rights supervising the execution of its judgments". Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights. 37 (3): 228–244. doi:10.1177/0924051919861844. S2CID 198671225. |hdl-access= requires |hdl= (help)
  43. ↑ Celiksoy, Ergul (2020). "Execution of the Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in Prisoners' Right to Vote Cases". Human Rights Law Review. 20 (3): 555–581. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngaa027.
  44. ↑ Milanovic, Marko (2010). "Sejdić & Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina". American Journal of International Law. 104 (4): 636–641. doi:10.5305/amerjintelaw.104.4.0636. S2CID 155306157.
  45. ↑ Johnson, P. (2011). "Homosexuality, Freedom of Assembly and the Margin of Appreciation Doctrine of the European Court of Human Rights: Alekseyev v Russia". Human Rights Law Review. 11 (3): 578–593. doi:10.1093/hrlr/ngr020.
  46. ↑ 46.0 46.1 Endsjø, Dag Øistein (2020). "The other way around? How freedom of religion may protect LGBT rights". The International Journal of Human Rights. 24 (10): 1681–1700. doi:10.1080/13642987.2020.1763961. |hdl-access= requires |hdl= (help)
  47. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named Bartenev
  48. ↑ Cannoot, Pieter (2019). "Alekseyev and Others v. Russia (Eur. Ct. H.R.)". International Legal Materials. 58 (6): 1251–1280. doi:10.1017/ilm.2019.53. S2CID 212883311.
  49. ↑ Ulfstein, Geir; Zimmermann, Andreas (2018). "Certiorari through the Back Door? The Judgment by the European Court of Human Rights in Burmych and Others v. Ukraine in Perspective". The Law & Practice of International Courts and Tribunals. 17 (2): 289–308. doi:10.1163/15718034-12341381. S2CID 149916470. |hdl-access= requires |hdl= (help)
  50. ↑ Reichel, David; Grimheden, Jonas (2018). "A Decade of Violations of the European Convention on Human Rights: Exploring Patterns of Repetitive Violations". European Yearbook on Human Rights 2018: 267–286. doi:10.1017/9781780688008.012. ISBN 9781780688008. S2CID 159227980.
  51. ↑ Vogiatzis, Nikos (2016). "The Admissibility Criterion Under Article 35(3)(b) ECHR: a 'Significant Disadvantage' to Human Rights Protection?". International and Comparative Law Quarterly. 65 (1): 185–211. doi:10.1017/S0020589315000573. S2CID 146428992.
  52. ↑ Bowring, Bill (2010). "The Russian Federation, Protocol No. 14 (and 14bis), and the Battle for the Soul of the ECHR". Goettingen Journal of International Law. 2 (2): 589–617. doi:10.3249/1868-1581-2-2-Bowring.
  53. ↑ Greer, Steven. "Europe". Daniel Moeckli et al. (Eds.), International Human Rights Law: 441–464 (452).
  54. ↑ Gerards, Janneke H.; Glas, Lize R. (2017). "Access to justice in the European Convention on Human Rights system". Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights. 35 (1): 11–30. doi:10.1177/0924051917693988. |hdl-access= requires |hdl= (help)
  55. ↑ Gruodytė, Edita; Kirchner, Stefan (2016). "Legal aid for intervenors in proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights". International Comparative Jurisprudence. 2 (1): 36–44. doi:10.1016/j.icj.2016.04.001.
  56. ↑ "Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights". Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  57. ↑ (Janneke ed.). Missing or empty |title= (help)
  58. ↑ "Right to Life". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  59. ↑ "Torture and Ill-treatment". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  60. ↑ Patel, Priti (2017). "Forced sterilization of women as discrimination". Public Health Reviews. 38. doi:10.1186/s40985-017-0060-9. ISSN 0301-0422. PMC 5809857. PMID 29450087.
  61. ↑ "Slavery and Human Trafficking". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  62. ↑ "Liberty". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  63. ↑ "Right to a Fair Trial". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  64. ↑ "Privacy". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  65. ↑ Bratic, Catherine (2012–2013). "A Comparative Approach to Understanding Developments in Privacy Rights in the European Court of Human Rights". Columbia Journal of European Law. 19: 341.
  66. ↑ "Family". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  67. ↑ Iliadou, Marianna (2019). "Surrogacy and the ECtHR: Reflections on Paradiso and Campanelli v Italy". Medical Law Review. 27 (1): 144–154. doi:10.1093/medlaw/fwy002. PMID 29481609.
  68. ↑ "Freedom of Religion". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  69. ↑ (James T. ed.). Missing or empty |title= (help)
  70. ↑ "Freedom of speech". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  71. ↑ Ajevski, Marjan (2014). "Freedom of Speech as Related to Journalists in the ECtHR, IACtHR and the Human Rights Committee – a Study of Fragmentation" (PDF). Nordic Journal of Human Rights. 32 (2): 118–139. doi:10.1080/18918131.2014.897797. S2CID 146169905. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09.
  72. ↑ "Freedom of Assembly". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  73. ↑ "Equality". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  74. ↑ Cashman, Laura (2017). "New label no progress: institutional racism and the persistent segregation of Romani students in the Czech Republic" (PDF). Race Ethnicity and Education. 20 (5): 595–608. doi:10.1080/13613324.2016.1191698. S2CID 148370419. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2022-10-09.
  75. ↑ "Property". Impact of the European Convention on Human Rights. Council of Europe. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  76. ↑ Empty citation (help)
  77. ↑ "Franklin D. Roosevelt Four Freedoms Awards". Roosevelt Institute. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  78. ↑ "Greek nomination of the European Court of Human Rights for the 2020 Nobel Peace Prize". Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
Daga "https://ha.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kotun_%27Yancin_Dan_Adam_ta_Turai&oldid=698080"