Jump to content

Yarjejeniyar Turai kan Haƙƙin Dan Adam

Daga Wikipedia, Insakulofidiya ta kyauta.
Infotaula d'esdevenimentYarjejeniyar Turai kan Haƙƙin Dan Adam
CEDH

Iri yarjejeniya
international human rights instrument (en) Fassara
Bangare na international human rights law (en) Fassara
Kwanan watan 4 Nuwamba, 1950
Ratification (en) Fassara
Albaniya (2 Oktoba 1996)
Andorra (22 ga Janairu, 1996)
Armeniya (26 ga Afirilu, 2002)
Austriya (3 Satumba 1958)
Azerbaijan (15 ga Afirilu, 2002)
Beljik (14 ga Yuni, 1955)
Herzegovina (12 ga Yuli, 2002)
Bulgairiya (7 Satumba 1992)
Kroatiya (5 Nuwamba, 1997)
Cyprus (6 Oktoba 1962)
Kazech (18 ga Maris, 1992)
Denmark (13 ga Afirilu, 1953)
Istoniya (16 ga Afirilu, 1996)
Finland (10 Mayu 1990)
Faransa (3 Mayu 1974)
Georgia (20 Mayu 1999)
Jamus (5 Disamba 1952)
Greek (28 Nuwamba, 1974)
Hungariya (5 Nuwamba, 1992)
Iceland (29 ga Yuni, 1953)
Ireland (25 ga Faburairu, 1953)
Italiya (26 Oktoba 1955)
Laitfiya (27 ga Yuni, 1997)
Liechtenstein (8 Satumba 1982)
Lithuania (20 ga Yuni, 1995)
Luksamburg (3 Satumba 1953)
Malta (23 ga Janairu, 1967)
Monaco (30 Nuwamba, 2005)
Montenegro (3 ga Maris, 2004)
Kingdom of the Netherlands (en) Fassara (31 ga Augusta, 1954)
Masadoiniya ta Arewa (10 ga Afirilu, 1997)
Norway (15 ga Janairu, 1952)
Poland (19 ga Janairu, 1993)
Portugal (9 Nuwamba, 1978)
MOldufiniya (12 Satumba 1997)
Romainiya (20 ga Yuni, 1994)
Rasha (5 Mayu 1998)
San Marino (22 ga Maris, 1989)
Serbiya (3 ga Maris, 2004)
Slofakiya (18 ga Maris, 1992)
Sloveniya (28 ga Yuni, 1994)
Ispaniya (4 Oktoba 1979)
Sweden (4 ga Faburairu, 1952)
Switzerland (28 Nuwamba, 1974)
Turkiyya (18 Mayu 1954)
Ukraniya (11 Satumba 1997)
Birtaniya (8 ga Maris, 1951)
Coming into force (en) Fassara 3 Satumba 1953
Wuri Roma
Depositary (en) Fassara Secretary General of the Council of Europe (en) Fassara
Harshen aiki ko suna Turanci
Has part(s) (en) Fassara
Protocol No. 11 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (en) Fassara

Yanar gizo coe.int…

Yarjejeniyar Turai akan Haƙƙin Dan Adam ( ECHR ; a hukumance Yarjejeniyar Kare Haƙƙin Dan Adam da yancin ɗan adam ) yarjejeniya ce ta ƙasa da ƙasa don kare haƙƙin ɗan adam da yancin siyasa a Turai.[1]

An tsara shi a cikin 1950 ta sabuwar Majalisar Turai da aka kafa a lokacin, [2] taron ya fara aiki a ranar 3 ga Satumba 1953. Dukkan kasashe mambobin majalisar Turai suna cikin taron kuma ana sa ran sabbin mambobin za su amince da taron da wuri.[3]

Yarjejeniyar ta kafa Kotunan Haƙƙin Dan Adam ta Turai (wanda aka fi sani da baƙaƙen ECtHR). Duk mutumin da ya ji an tauye masa hakkinsa a ƙarƙashin babban taron da wata jam’iyyar jiha ta yi zai iya kai kara a kotu. Hukunce-hukuncen gano cin zarafi na da nasaba da jihohin da abin ya shafa kuma wajibi ne su aiwatar da su. Kwamitin Ministoci na Majalisar Turai na sa ido kan yadda ake aiwatar da hukunce-hukunce, musamman don tabbatar da biyan kudaden da kotun ta bayar ya biya diyya yadda ya kamata ga masu neman wannan barnar da suka yi.[4]

Yarjejeniyar tana da ka'idoji da yawa, waɗanda ke gyara tsarin al'ada.

Yarjejeniyar ta yi tasiri sosai a kan doka a Majalisar Tarayyar Turai[5] kuma ana daukarta a matsayin yarjejeniya ta kasa da kasa mafi inganci don kare hakkin dan adam. [6]

Tarihi[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Tambarin Ukrainian, bikin cika shekaru 60 na Yarjejeniyar Turai kan Hakkokin Dan Adam

Yarjejeniyar Turai kan Haƙƙin Bil Adama ta taka muhimmiyar rawa wajen haɓakawa da wayar da kan 'yancin ɗan adam a Turai. Ana iya ganin ci gaban tsarin yanki na kare haƙƙin ɗan adam da ke aiki a duk faɗin Turai a matsayin martani kai tsaye ga matsalolin tagwaye. Na farko, bayan yakin duniya na biyu, taron, wanda ya yi la'akari da wahayi na Yarjejeniya ta Duniya game da 'Yancin Dan Adam, ana iya ganin shi a matsayin wani bangare na mayar da martani mafi girma daga Ƙungiyoyin Ƙungiyoyin Ƙarfafawa wajen ba da ajandar 'yancin ɗan adam don hana mafi muni. take hakkin dan Adam da ya faru a lokacin yakin duniya na biyu daga sake faruwa.[7]

Na biyu, taron ya kasance martani ne ga ci gaban Stalinism a Tsakiya da Gabashin Turai kuma an tsara shi ne don kare ƙasashe mambobin Majalisar Turai daga rushewar gurguzu. Wannan, a wani bangare, yana bayyana abubuwan da aka saba da su game da dabi'u da ka'idoji waɗanda " masu zama dole a cikin al'ummar dimokuradiyya " a duk lokacin babban taron, duk da cewa ba a bayyana irin waɗannan ka'idodin ta kowace hanya a cikin taron kanta ba.

Daga 7 zuwa 10 ga Mayu 1948, 'yan siyasa ciki har da Winston Churchill, François Mitterrand, da Konrad Adenauer ; wakilan jama'a; malamai; shugabannin kasuwanci; 'yan kungiyar kwadago; da shugabannin addinai suka kira taron Majalisar Turai a Hague . A karshen taron, an ba da sanarwa da kuma alƙawarin ƙirƙirar taron. Labari na biyu da na uku na alkawarin sun bayyana cewa: “Muna bukatar Yarjejeniya ta ‘Yancin Dan Adam da ke tabbatar da ‘yancin yin tunani, taro da bayyana ra’ayi da kuma ‘yancin kafa ‘yan adawar siyasa. Muna bukatar kotun shari'a da ta sanya takunkumi mai yawa don aiwatar da wannan Yarjejeniyar."[8]

Majalisar Turai ce ta shirya taron bayan yakin duniya na biyu da Majalisar Hague. Sama da 'yan majalisa 100 daga ƙasashe mambobi goma sha biyu na Majalisar Turai sun taru a Strasbourg a lokacin rani na 1949 don taron farko na Majalisar Tuntuba ta Majalisar don tsara "yarjejeniya ta 'yancin ɗan adam" da kuma kafa kotu don tilasta shi. Dan majalisar dokokin Burtaniya kuma lauya Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe, shugaban kwamitin majalisar kan Haƙƙoƙin shari'a da tambayoyin gudanarwa, na daya daga cikin manyan mambobinta kuma ya jagoranci shirya taron, bisa wani daftarin farko da kungiyar Turai ta samar.[9] A matsayinsa na mai gabatar da kara a Kotun Nuremberg, ya ga yadda za a yi amfani da adalci na kasa da kasa yadda ya kamata.

Tsohon ministan Faransa kuma dan gwagwarmaya Pierre-Henri Teitgen ya gabatar da rahoto ga Majalisar yana ba da shawarar jerin Haƙƙoƙin da za a kare, da zabar lamba daga cikin Yarjejeniyar Kare Haƙƙoƙin Dan Adam ta Duniya da aka amince da ita kwanan nan a New York, da kuma bayyana yadda tsarin aiwatar da shari'a zai iya aiki. Bayan muhawara mai yawa, Majalisar ta aika da shawararta ta ƙarshe zuwa ga kwamitin ministocin majalisar, wanda ya kira gungun masana don tsara taron da kansa.

An tsara taron ne don haɗa tsarin 'yancin ɗan adam na al'ada don tabbatar da "dimokradiyyar siyasa mai inganci", daga al'adu mafi ƙarfi a cikin Burtaniya, Faransa da sauran ƙasashe membobin Majalisar ƙanana na Turai, kamar yadda Guido Raimondi, shugaban Turai ya faɗa. Kotun kare hakkin Dan Adam :


An buɗe taron don sanya hannu a ranar 4 ga Nuwamba 1950 a Roma. An amince da shi kuma ya fara aiki a ranar 3 ga Satumba 1953. Kotun Turai ta kare Haƙƙin dan Adam da ke Strasbourg da Majalisar Turai ne ke kula da ita da kuma tilasta ta. Har zuwa gyare-gyaren tsari a ƙarshen 1990s, Ƙungiyar Tarayyar Turai kan Haƙƙin Dan Adam ita ma ta kula da taron.

Zayyana[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

An tsara wannan yarjejeniya a cikin sharuddan da yawa, a cikin irin wannan (duk da cewa ya fi na zamani) zuwa 1689 Scottish Claim of Right Act 1689, zuwa 1689 Bill of Rights, da 1791 US Bill of Rights, 1789 Faransa Declaration of Rights Mutum da na ɗan ƙasa, ko kuma ɓangaren farko na Babban Dokar Jamus . Maganganun ƙa'ida, ta mahangar shari'a, ba su da ƙayyadaddun ƙayyadaddun ƙayyadaddun bayanai kuma suna buƙatar fassarori da yawa daga kotuna don fitar da ma'ana a cikin yanayi na gaskiya. [10]

Labaran taro[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Kamar yadda Protocol 11 ta gyara, taron ya ƙunshi sassa uku. Babban haƙƙi da yanci suna cikin sashe na I, wanda ya ƙunshi Labari na 2 zuwa 18. Sashi na II (Mataki na 19 zuwa 51) ya kafa kotu da dokokinta na aiki. Sashi na III ya ƙunshi tanadin ƙarewa iri-iri.

Kafin fara aiki da yarjejeniya ta 11, Sashe na II (Mataki na 19) ya kafa Hukumar da Kotu, Sashe na uku (Mataki na 20 zuwa na 37) da IV (Mataki na 38 zuwa 59) sun hada da manyan injina don gudanar da aikin. bi da bi, Hukumar da kotu, da Sashe na V sun ƙunshi tanadi daban-daban na ƙarshe.

Yawancin labaran da ke cikin Sashe na I an tsara su a cikin sakin layi biyu: na farko ya tsara wani hakki na asali ko 'yanci (kamar Mataki na 2 (1) - 'yancin rayuwa) amma na biyu ya ƙunshi nau'o'in keɓancewa, keɓancewa ko iyakance akan haƙƙin asali. (kamar Mataki na 2 (2) - wanda ya bambanta da wasu amfani da karfi da ke kai ga mutuwa).

Mataki na 1 - mutunta hakki[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 1 kawai ya ɗaure ɓangarorin da suka rattaba hannu don tabbatar da haƙƙoƙin ƙarƙashin sauran batutuwan yarjejeniyar "a cikin ikonsu". A cikin yanayi na musamman, "hukunce-hukuncen" ba za a iya keɓe shi ga yankin ƙasar da ke da kwangilar ba; wajibcin tabbatar da haƙƙin haƙƙin al'ada sannan kuma ya shafi yankunan ƙasashen waje, kamar ƙasar da aka mamaye wanda jihar ke aiwatar da ingantaccen iko.

A Loizidou da Turkiyya, [11] Kotun Kare Hakkokin Dan Adam ta Turai ta yanke hukuncin cewa ikon kasashe mambobin kungiyar ya faɗaɗa zuwa yankunan da ke karkashin ikon wannan jiha sakamakon matakin soja.

Mataki na 2 - rayuwa[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

A shekara ta 2019, Kotun Koli ta Netherlands ta yi ƙaulin talifi na 2 na ECHR cewa dole ne gwamnati ta iyakance sauyin yanayi don kare lafiyar ɗan adam.

Mataki na biyu ya kare hakkin kowane mutum na rayuwarsa. Haƙƙin rayuwa ya shafi mutane ne kawai, ba ga dabbobi ba, [12] ko ga “masu shari’a” kamar kamfanoni. [12] A Evans da United Kingdom, kotu ta yanke hukuncin cewa ko ’yancin yin rayuwa ya shafi jinjirin ɗan adam ya faɗo a cikin wani yanki na godiya . A cikin Vo v Faransa, kotu ta ki ba da damar yin rayuwa ga jaririn da ba a haifa ba, yayin da yake bayyana cewa "ba kyawawa ba ne, kuma ba zai yiwu ba kamar yadda al'amura suka tsaya, a amsa a cikin m tambayar ko yaron da aka haifa shi ne. mutum don manufar sashe na 2 na Yarjejeniyar”. [13]

Kotun ta yanke hukuncin cewa jihohi suna da manyan ayyuka uku a karkashin doka ta 2:

  1. wajibcin nisantar kisan gilla.
  2. wani aiki na bincikar mutuwar da ake tuhuma, da
  3. a wasu yanayi, kyakkyawan aiki don hana asarar rayuka da ake iya gani. [14]

Sakin layi na farko na labarin ya ƙunshi keɓantacce don hukuncin kisa na halal, kodayake wannan keɓancewar an maye gurbinsa da ladabi na 6 da 13. Yarjejeniya ta 6 ta hana sanya hukuncin kisa a lokacin zaman lafiya, yayin da yarjejeniya ta 13 ta tsawaita haramcin ga kowane yanayi. (Don ƙarin akan ladabi 6 da 13, duba ƙasa ).

Sakin layi na biyu na Mataki na biyu ya tanadi cewa mutuwar da aka samu ta hanyar kare kai ko wasu, kama wanda ake zargi ko wanda ya gudu, ko murƙushe tarzoma ko tada kayar baya, ba za ta ci karo da labarin ba yayin da amfani da karfin da abin ya shafa bai wuce wajabta ba.

Kasashen da suka rattaba hannu kan yarjejeniyar za su iya yin watsi da Haƙƙoƙin da ke kunshe a cikin Mataki na 2 na mace-macen da ke faruwa a sakamakon halaltaccen yaki.

Kotun Turai ta kare Haƙƙin dan Adam ba ta yanke hukunci game da 'yancin rayuwa har zuwa 1995, lokacin da a McCann da Sauransu v United Kingdom [15] ta yanke hukuncin cewa banda abin da ke cikin sakin layi na biyu ba ya zama yanayi lokacin da aka ba shi izinin kisa, amma yanayin da aka ba da izinin yin amfani da karfi wanda zai iya haifar da rashi na rayuwa. [16]

Mataki na 3 - azabtarwa[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 3 ya haramta azabtarwa da "cin mutunci ko wulakanci ko hukunci". Babu keɓantacce ko iyakance akan wannan haƙƙin. Wannan tanadin yakan shafi, baya ga azabtarwa, ga shari'o'in mummunan tashin hankalin 'yan sanda da rashin kyawun yanayin tsarewa.[17]

Kotun ta nanata ainihin yanayin sashe na 3 da ke tabbatar da cewa an yi haramcin ne a cikin “cikakkiyar sharuddan ... ba tare da la'akari da halin wanda aka azabtar ba"[18][19][20]

Kotun ta kuma ce jihohi ba za su iya korar ko mika wasu mutanen da za a iya azabtarwa, cin zarafi ko azabtarwa ba, a cikin jihar da aka samu. [21]

Shari'ar farko don bincika Mataki na 3 shine shari'ar Girkanci, wanda ya kafa misali mai tasiri. [22] A cikin Ireland v. Ƙasar Ingila (1979-1980) Kotun ta yanke hukuncin cewa dabaru guda biyar da Burtaniya ta ɓullo da su ( tsaye bango, rufe fuska, biyayya ga hayaniya, hana barci, da hana abinci da abin sha ), kamar yadda aka yi amfani da su a kan fursunoni goma sha huɗu a Arewacin Ireland. ta Burtaniya sun kasance "marasa mutunci da wulakanci" kuma sun keta yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'yancin ɗan adam, amma ba ta kai ga "azabtarwa ba".[23]

A Aksoy v. Turkiyya (1997) Kotu ta samu Turkiyya da laifin azabtarwa a shekarar 1996 a shari'ar wani da ake tsare da shi da aka dakatar da shi da hannu yayin da aka daure hannunsa a bayansa. [24]

Salmouni v. Faransa (2000) kotu ta bayyana a fili don gano jihohi da laifin azabtar da hukuncin cewa tun da taron "kayan aiki ne na rai", za a iya ɗaukar mu'amala da a baya a matsayin cin mutunci ko wulakanci a nan gaba a matsayin azabtarwa.[25]

A cikin 2014, bayan da aka gano sabbin bayanai da suka nuna shawarar yin amfani da dabaru guda biyar a Ireland ta Arewa a 1971-1972 ministocin Biritaniya sun dauka, Gwamnatin Irish ta nemi Kotun Turai ta Hakkokin Dan Adam ta sake duba hukuncinta. A shekarar 2018, da kuri'u shida zuwa daya, kotun ta ki amincewa.

Mataki na 4 - bauta[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 4 ya haramta bautar, bauta da aikin tilas amma ya keɓe aiki:

  • aikata shi a matsayin al'ada na ɗaurin kurkuku,
  • a matsayin aikin soja na dole ko aikin da aka yi a madadin waɗanda suka ƙi aikin soja,
  • da ake bukata a yi a lokacin dokar ta-baci, da
  • ana ɗauka a matsayin wani ɓangare na “wajibi na al’ada” na mutum.

Mataki na 5 - 'yanci da tsaro[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 5 ya tanadi cewa kowa na da ‘yancin walwala da tsaron lafiyarsa. Ana ɗaukar 'yanci da tsaro na mutum a matsayin "haɗin gwiwa" ra'ayi - tsaro na mutum bai kasance ƙarƙashin fassarar daban ta kotu ba.

Mataki na 5 yana ba da haƙƙin ' yanci, ƙarƙashin kamawa bisa doka ko tsarewa a ƙarƙashin wasu yanayi, kamar kama bisa kyakkyawan zato na wani laifi ko ɗaurin kurkuku don cika hukunci. Kasidar ta kuma bayar da damar a sanar da wadanda aka kama, a cikin harshen da suka fahimta, dalilan da suka sa aka kama su, da kuma duk wani tuhuma da ake fuskanta, da hakkin gaggauta shigar da kara a gaban shari’a don sanin halaccin kamawa ko tsare shi. shari'a a cikin lokaci mai ma'ana ko sakin da ke jiran shari'a, da haƙƙin biyan diyya a cikin yanayin kamawa ko tsarewa wanda ya saba wa wannan labarin.

  • <i id="mw4Q">Assanidze v.</i> <i id="mw4Q">Jojiya</i> , App. No. 71503/01 (EUR. Ct. HR 8 Afrilu 2004)

Mataki na 6 - shari'ar gaskiya[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 6 yana ba da cikakken haƙƙin yin shari'a ta gaskiya, gami da haƙƙin sauraron sauraron jama'a a gaban kotun shari'a mai zaman kanta da rashin son kai a cikin lokacin da ya dace, da ɗaukan rashin laifi, da sauran mafi ƙarancin haƙƙoƙi ga waɗanda ake tuhuma da laifin aikata laifi (isasshen lokaci da wurare don shirya kariyarsu, samun damar samun wakilcin shari'a, 'yancin bincikar shaidu akan su ko a bincika su, dama ga taimakon kyauta na mai fassara). [26]

Yawancin cin zarafi na al'ada da kotu ta samu a yau shine jinkirin da ya wuce kima, wanda ya saba wa "lokacin da ya dace" da ake bukata, a cikin shari'ar farar hula da na laifuka a gaban kotunan kasa, yawanci a Italiya da Faransa . A karkashin sharuddan "kotu mai zaman kanta", kotun ta yanke hukuncin cewa alkalan sojoji a kotunan tsaron kasar Turkiyya sun sabawa doka ta 6. Dangane da wannan labarin, Turkiyya ta amince da dokar da za ta soke wadannan kotuna.

Wani muhimmin sashe na cin zarafi ya shafi "bangaren adawa" na Mataki na 6 (watau 'yancin bincikar shaidu ko a duba su). A wannan yanayin, matsalolin bin doka na 6 na iya tasowa lokacin da dokokin ƙasa suka ba da izinin amfani da shaidar shaidar shaidun da ba su nan, ba a san su ba da kuma masu rauni.

  • Karfe v. Ƙasar Ingila (1998) 28 EHR 603
  • Assanidze v. Jojiya [2004] ECHR 140
  • Othman (Abu Qatada) v. Ƙasar Ingila (2012) - Ba za a iya fitar da Abu Qatada zuwa Jordan ba saboda hakan zai zama cin zarafi na Mataki na 6 "idan aka ba da haƙƙin shigar da shaidar da aka samu ta hanyar azabtarwa". Wannan shi ne karo na farko da kotu ta yanke hukuncin cewa korar irin wannan zai zama sabawa doka ta 6.

Mataki na 7 - sake kunnawa[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 7 ya hana sake aikata laifuka da rashin aiki. Ba za a iya hukunta wani mutum kan wani aiki da ba laifi ba ne a lokacin da aka aiwatar da shi. Kasidar ta bayyana cewa, laifin da ake aikata laifuka yana cikin dokokin kasa ko na kasa da kasa, wanda zai ba da damar wani bangare ya tuhumi wani da laifin da bai sabawa dokar cikin gida a lokacin ba, matukar dai dokar kasa da kasa ta haramta shi. Har ila yau, labarin ya haramta yin hukunci mai nauyi fiye da wanda aka zartar a lokacin da aka aikata laifin.

Mataki na 7 ya ƙunshi ƙa'idar doka ta laifi, nulla poena sine lege (babu laifi, babu hukunci ba tare da doka ba) cikin taron.

Abubuwan da suka dace sune:

  • Kokkinaki v. Girka [1993] ECHR 20
  • SAS v. Faransa [2014] ECHR 69

Mataki na 8 - keɓantawa[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 8 yana ba da haƙƙin mutunta "rayuwar sirri da iyali, gidansa da wasiƙunsa ", bisa wasu ƙuntatawa waɗanda "bisa ga doka" da "wajibi a cikin al'ummar dimokuradiyya". Wannan labarin a fili ya ba da ’yancin samun ‘yanci daga binciken da ba bisa ka’ida ba, amma kotu ta ba da kariya ga “rayuwar sirri da ta iyali” cewa wannan labarin ya ba da fassarorin fassarorin, alal misali haramcin yin luwadi da madigo na sirri ya saba wa wannan labarin. An yi shari'o'in da ke tattauna alaƙar jima'i na iyali, da kuma yadda laifin wannan zai iya keta wannan labarin. Duk da haka, ECHR har yanzu tana ƙyale irin waɗannan ayyukan jima'i na iyali su zama masu laifi. [27]

Ana iya kwatanta wannan da hukunce-hukuncen Kotun Koli ta Amurka, wacce kuma ta ɗauki ɗan taƙaitaccen fassarar 'yancin keɓewa . Bugu da ƙari, Labari 8 wani lokaci ya ƙunshi tabbataccen wajibai : [28] yayin da aka tsara haƙƙin ɗan adam na gargajiya a matsayin hana ƙasa shiga haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin ɗan adam, don haka kar a yi wani abu (misali kar a raba iyali ƙarƙashin kariyar rayuwar iyali), ingantaccen jin daɗin irin waɗannan haƙƙoƙin na iya yiwuwa. Har ila yau, sun haɗa da wani wajibci ga jiha don yin aiki, da yin wani abu (misali don tilasta damar iyaye da aka saki ga ɗansa).

Abubuwan da suka shahara:

  • Zakharov v. Rasha [2015] EHCR 47143/06
  • Malon v. Ƙasar Ingila [1984] ECHR 10, (1984) 7 EHRR 14
  • Oliari da sauransu v. Italiya (2015)

Mataki na 9 - lamiri da addini[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 9 ya tanadi ' yancin yin tunani, lamiri da addini . Wannan ya hada da 'yancin canza addini ko akida, da kuma bayyanar da addini ko imani a cikin bauta, koyarwa, aiki da kuma kiyayewa, bisa wasu ƙuntatawa waɗanda "suka dace da doka" da "wajibi a cikin al'ummar dimokuradiyya".

Abubuwan da suka dace sune:

  • Kokkinaki v. Girka [1993] ECHR 20
  • Universelles Leben e. V. v. Jamus [1996] (app. no. 29745/96)
  • Buscarini da sauransu v. San Marino [1999] ECHR 7
  • Pichon da Sajous v. Faransa [2001] ECHR 898
  • Leyla Shahin v. Turkiyya [2004] ECHR 299
  • Leela Förderkreis EV da Wasu v. Jamus [2008] ECHR
  • Lautsi v. Italiya [2011] ECHR 2412
  • SAS v. Faransa [2014] ECHR 695
  • Eweida v. Ƙasar Ingila [2013] ECHR 2013

Mataki na 10 - magana[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 10 yana ba da 'yancin faɗar albarkacin baki, ƙarƙashin wasu ƙuntatawa waɗanda suke "bisa ga doka" da "wajibi a cikin al'ummar dimokuradiyya". Wannan haƙƙin ya haɗa da 'yancin ɗaukar ra'ayi, da karɓa da ba da bayanai da ra'ayoyi, amma yana ba da damar hani don:

  • bukatun tsaron kasa
  • mutuncin yanki ko lafiyar jama'a
  • rigakafin cuta ko laifi
  • kariya daga lafiya ko ɗabi'a
  • kare mutunci ko hakkin wasu
  • hana bayyana bayanan da aka karɓa cikin aminci
  • kiyaye iko da nuna son kai na bangaren shari'a
  • Lingens v. Austria (1986) 8 EHR 407
  • The Observer da The Guardian v. Ƙasar Ingila (1991) 14 EHRR 153, shari'ar " Spycatcher ".
  • Bowman v. Ƙasar Ingila [1998] ECHR 4, (1998) 26 EHRR 1, rarraba ɗimbin kayan yaƙi da zubar da ciki wanda ya saba wa dokokin kashe kuɗin zaɓe.
  • Jam'iyyar Kwaminisanci v. Turkiyya (1998) 26 EHR 1211
  • Appleby v. Ƙasar Ingila (2003) 37 EHRR 38, zanga-zangar a wata cibiyar kasuwanci mai zaman kanta
  • TV Vest da Rogaland Pensioners Party v. Norway (2008)

Mataki na 11 - ƙungiya[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na ashirin da 11 yana kare haƙƙin 'yancin yin taro da ƙungiyoyi, ciki har da haƙƙin kafa ƙungiyoyin kasuwanci, ƙarƙashin wasu ƙuntatawa waɗanda suke "bisa ga doka" da "wajibi a cikin al'ummar dimokuradiyya".

  • Vogt v. Jamus (1995)
  • Yazar, Karatas, Aksoy and Hep v. Turkiyya (2003) 36 EHR 59
  • Bączkowski v. Poland (2005)

Mataki na 12 - aure[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 12 ya tanadi hakkin mata da mazan da suka kai shekarun aure su yi aure su kafa iyali.

Duk da gayyata da yawa, kotun ta ki yin amfani da kariyar wannan labarin ga auren jinsi . Kotun ta kare hakan ne bisa hujjar cewa labarin an yi nufin ya shafi auren jinsi dabam-dabam ne kawai, kuma dole ne a ba da fifikon godiya ga bangarorin wannan fanni.

A cikin Goodwin v. Kotun daukaka kara ta Burtaniya ta yanke hukuncin cewa wata doka da har yanzu ta ke raba wadanda suka yi jima'i bayan yin jima'i a karkashin jima'i kafin su yi jima'i ya saba wa doka ta 12 da ke nufin cewa masu yin jima'i ba za su iya aurar da 'yan uwansu ba. Wannan ya sauya hukuncin da ya gabata a cikin Rees v. Ƙasar Ingila . Duk da haka, wannan bai canza fahimtar Kotun ba cewa Mataki na 12 yana ba da kariya ga ma'aurata daban-daban kawai.

Kotun Turai ta kare hakkin dan Adam ta yanke hukunci a Schalk da Kopf v. Austria cewa ba a buƙatar ƙasashe su ba da lasisin aure ga ma'auratan; duk da haka, idan wata ƙasa ta ba da izinin auren ma'auratan, dole ne a yi shi a ƙarƙashin yanayin da ma'auratan ke fuskanta. [ana buƙatar hujja], don hana karya labarin 14 - haramcin nuna bambanci. Bugu da ƙari, kotu ta yanke hukunci a shari'ar 2015 na Oliari da Sauran v. Italiya wadda ke da alhakin tabbatar da cewa akwai takamaiman tsari na doka don amincewa da kare ma'auratan jima'i.

Mataki na 13 - ingantaccen magani[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 13 ya ba da damar samun ingantaccen magani a gaban hukumomin ƙasa saboda take haƙƙin da ke ƙarƙashin yarjejeniyar. Rashin iya samun magani a gaban kotun ƙasa don keta haƙƙin Yarjejeniyar don haka cin zarafi ne na 'yanci da kuma daban-daban.

Mataki na 14 - nuna bambanci[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 14 ya ƙunshi haramcin nuna bambanci . Wannan haramcin yana da faɗi ta wasu hanyoyi kuma kunkuntar a wasu. Yana da faɗi a cikin cewa yana hana nuna bambanci a ƙarƙashin wasu dalilai marasa iyaka. Yayin da labarin ya haramta wariya ta musamman kan "jima'i, launin fata, launi, harshe, addini, siyasa ko wasu ra'ayoyi, asalin ƙasa ko zamantakewa, alaƙa da tsiraru na ƙasa, dukiya, haihuwa ko wani matsayi", na ƙarshe na waɗannan ya ba da damar kotu. don mika kariyar doka ta 14 zuwa wasu dalilan da ba a ambata ba kamar yadda aka yi game da nuna bambanci dangane da yanayin jima'i na mutum.

A lokaci guda, kariyar labarin ta iyakance ne saboda kawai ta hana nuna bambanci dangane da haƙƙin da ke ƙarƙashin yarjejeniyar. Don haka, mai nema dole ne ya tabbatar da nuna wariya a cikin jin daɗin takamaiman haƙƙin da aka tabbatar da shi a wani wuri a cikin yarjejeniyar (misali nuna bambanci dangane da jima'i - Mataki na 14 - cikin jin daɗin yancin faɗar albarkacin baki - Mataki na 10). [27]

Yarjejeniya ta 12 ta tsawaita wannan haramcin don rufe nuna wariya a kowane hakki na doka, ko da kuwa wannan haƙƙin na doka ba a kiyaye shi ba a ƙarƙashin yarjejeniyar, muddin an tanadar da shi a cikin dokar ƙasa.

Mataki na 15 - derogations[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 15 ya bai wa kasashe masu kwangila damar yin watsi da wasu hakkoki da yarjejeniyar ta ba su a lokacin "yaki ko wani gaggawar jama'a da ke barazana ga rayuwar al'umma". Abubuwan da aka halatta a ƙarƙashin labarin 15 dole ne su cika ƙa'idodi guda uku:

  1. dole ne a samar da gaggawar jama'a da ke barazana ga rayuwar al'umma;
  2. duk wani matakan da za a ɗauka don mayar da martani dole ne a "buƙata sosai ta wurin abubuwan da ke faruwa"; kuma
  3. Dole ne matakan da aka ɗauka don mayar da martani ga hakan ya dace da sauran wajibai na ƙasa a ƙarƙashin dokokin ƙasa da ƙasa.

Baya ga waɗannan ƙaƙƙarfan buƙatun, ɓacin rai dole ne ya kasance daidai da tsari. Dole ne a sami wasu sanarwa na ƙasƙanci da sanarwa na lalata da duk wani matakan da aka ɗauka a ƙarƙashinsa, kuma dole ne a sanar da ƙarshen ƙaddamarwa ga Sakatare-Janar na Majalisar Turai . [29]

Tun daga shekarar 2016, kasashe mambobi takwas sun taba kiran cin mutunci. Kotun ta ba da izini sosai wajen karɓar ɓarnar da wata ƙasa ta yi daga babban taron amma ta yi amfani da babban mataki na bincike don yanke shawarar ko matakan da jihohi ke ɗauka a ƙarƙashin ɓatanci ne, a cikin kalmomi na Mataki na 15, “masu buƙatu ne ta hanyar abubuwan da ke faruwa”. Don haka a cikin A v Birtaniya, kotun ta yi watsi da ikirarin da gwamnatin Birtaniya ta gabatar na mayar da martani kan harin na ranar 11 ga watan Satumba ba shi da inganci, amma ta ci gaba da gano cewa matakan da Birtaniyar ta dauka a karkashin wannan wulakanci ba su dace ba. 

Misalan irin waɗannan ɓangarorin sun haɗa da:

  • A cikin shari'ar Girka ta 1969, Hukumar Turai ta 'Yancin Dan Adam ta yanke hukuncin cewa zage-zagen ba shi da inganci saboda zarge-zargen da ake yi wa gurguzu ba ya haifar da babbar barazana. [30] Wannan shine kawai lokacin da tsarin tarurrukan ya ƙi yunƙurin ɓarna. [31]
  • Operation Demetrius — An kama masu shiga yanar gizo ba tare da shari'a ba bisa ga "Operation Demetrius" ba zai iya kokawa ga Hukumar Haƙƙin Dan Adam ta Turai game da keta doka ta 5 ba saboda a ranar 27 ga Yuni 1975, Burtaniya ta shigar da sanarwa tare da Majalisar Turai tana bayyana cewa akwai " gaggawar jama'a a cikin ma'anar sashe na 15 (1) na Yarjejeniyar".

Mataki na 16 - jam'iyyun kasashen waje[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 16 ya baiwa jihohi damar takaita ayyukan siyasa na kasashen waje. Kotun ta yanke hukuncin cewa kasashe mambobin Tarayyar Turai ba za su iya daukar 'yan wasu kasashe mambobin a matsayin baki. [32]

Mataki na 17 - cin zarafin hakki[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 17 ya tanadi cewa babu wanda zai iya amfani da haƙƙoƙin da yarjejeniyar ta amince da ita don neman sokewa ko iyakance haƙƙoƙin da aka lamunce a cikin yarjejeniyar. Wannan ya shafi al'amuran da jihohi ke neman tauye haƙƙin ɗan adam da sunan wani haƙƙin ɗan adam, ko kuma inda daidaikun mutane suka dogara da yancin ɗan adam don tauye wasu haƙƙoƙin ɗan adam (misali inda mutum ya yi barazanar kisa).

  • Jam'iyyar Kwaminisanci ta Jamus da Tarayyar Jamus (1957), Hukumar ta ƙi yin la'akari da ƙarar da Jam'iyyar Kwaminisanci ta Jamus ta yi, inda ta bayyana cewa koyarwar gurguzu da suke ba da shawara ba ta jitu da babban taron ba, tana mai nuni da iyakokin labarin 17 game da haƙƙoƙin. har ya zama dole a hana rushewar su daga masu bin koyarwar kama-karya.

Mataki na 18 - hani da aka halatta[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 18 ya tanadar da cewa duk wani iyakance kan haƙƙoƙin da aka tanadar a cikin yarjejeniyar za a iya amfani da shi kawai don manufar da aka ba su. Misali, Mataki na 5, wanda ke ba da yancin walwala, ana iya iyakance shi a sarari don gabatar da wanda ake tuhuma a gaban alkali. Yin amfani da tsare tsare kafin shari'a a matsayin hanyar tsoratar da mutum a ƙarƙashin hujjar ƙarya, saboda haka, iyakance haƙƙin ('yanci) ne wanda ba ya amfani da wata manufa ta fito fili (wanda za a gabatar da shi a gaban alkali), don haka ne. Sabanin Mataki na 18.

Ƙa'idojin yarjejeniya[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

As of January 2010, fifteen protocols to the convention have been opened for signature. These can be divided into two main groups: those amending the framework of the convention system, and those expanding the rights that can be protected. The former require unanimous ratification by member states before coming into force, while the latter require a certain number of states to sign before coming into force.

Protocol 1[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Wannan Yarjejeniya ta ƙunshi haƙƙoƙi daban-daban guda uku waɗanda masu rattaba hannu kan yarjejeniyar ba za su amince a sanya su a cikin yarjejeniyar ba. Monaco da Switzerland sun sanya hannu amma ba su amince da yarjejeniya ba 1. [33]

Mataki na 1 - dukiya[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

Mataki na 1 ("A1P1") [34] ya ba da cewa "kowane mutum na halitta ko na shari'a yana da hakkin ya sami kwanciyar hankali na dukiyarsa ". Kotun Turai ta kare hakkin dan Adam ta amince da cin zarafin daidaito tsakanin bukatun bukatun jama'a da kuma bukatun kare hakkin dan adam, kuma, a cikin rashin tabbas - ga mai shi - game da makomar gaba. dukiya, kuma in babu alawus.

A cikin hali na Mifsud da sauransu v Malta (38770/17) da Malta jihar an gano cewa sun keta Mataki na ashirin da 1 na Protocol No. 1 ga taron. Lamarin ya shafi wani fili mallakar dangin Mifsud da magadansu wanda aka kwace sau biyu (a cikin 1984 da 2012). Kotun, a cikin hukuncin da ta yanke, ta bayyana cewa “Kotun tsarin mulki (Maltese) ba ta da wata hujja a kan sakamakon binciken nata. Kotu ta damu da yanayin da ake ciki a halin yanzu wanda ya kai ga an amince da kwace kadarorin ba tare da wani ya iya bayyana dalilan da suka sa aka kwace irin wannan ba.”

Manazarta[gyara sashe | gyara masomin]

  1. Resolution 1031 (1994) on the honouring of commitments entered into by member states when joining the Council of Europe Archived 10 ga Janairu, 2010 at the Wayback Machine.
  2. The Council of Europe should not be confused with the Council of the European Union or the European Council.
  3. However, in their dissident opinions in the Nikolova case, judges Greve and Giovanni Bonello expressed preference for symbolic compensation ( " token " ) over moral compensation Buonomo, Giampiero (2002). "Caso Craxi: non-c'è spazio per complotti ma le norme processuali valgono una condanna all'Italia". Diritto&Giustizia Edizione Online. Archived from the original on 24 March 2016. Retrieved 21 March 2016.
  4. Andreadakis, S. (2013). "The European Convention on Human Rights, the EU and the UK: Confronting a Heresy: A Reply to Andrew Williams". European Journal of International Law. 24 (4): 1187–1193. doi:10.1093/ejil/cht063. Five decades later, it is undisputed that the ECHR has been successful in carrying out its mission, judging from its influence on the laws and social realities of the contracting parties, the extensive jurisprudence in the field of the protection of human rights, as well as the remarkable compliance with the ECtHR’s judgments.
  5. European Convention on Human Rights Guide for the Civil & Public Service (PDF) (Report). Irish Human Rights Commission. 2012. ISBN 978-0-9569820-7-0.
  6. Empty citation (help)
  7. Ovey, Clare; Robin C.A. White (2006). The European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford University Press. pp. 1–3. ISBN 978-0-19-928810-6.
  8. Ovey, Clare; Robin C.A. White (2006). The European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford University Press. pp. 1–3. ISBN 978-0-19-928810-6.
  9. Mowbray, Alastair (2007). Cases and Materials on the European Convention on Human Rights. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. pp. 1–2. ISBN 978-0-19-920674-2.
  10. D. Vitkauskas, G. Dikov Protecting the Right to a Fair Trial under the European Convention on Human Rights. A Handbook for Legal Practitioners. 2nd Edition, prepared by Dovydas Vitkauskas Strasbourg, Council of Europe, 2017, pages 11-15
  11. (Preliminary Objections) (1995) 20 EHRR 99
  12. 12.0 12.1 Korff, Douwe (November 2006). "The Right to Life: A Guide to the Implementation of Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights". Human Rights Handbook No. 8. Council of Europe. p. 10
  13. Vo v. France, section 85 of the judgment
  14. Jacobs & White, p. 56
  15. (1995) 21 EHRR 97
  16. (1995) 21 EHRR 97 at para. 148
  17. Chahal v. United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 413; Soering v. United Kingdom (1989) 11 EHRR 439.
  18. Chahal v. United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 413.
  19. Dickson, Brice (2010). The European Convention on Human Rights and the Conflict in Northern Ireland (in Turanci). Oxford University Press. p. 139. ISBN 978-0-19-957138-3.
  20. Aksoy v. Turkey (1997) 23 EHRR 553. The process was referred to by the Court as "Palestinian hanging" but more commonly known as Strappado.
  21. Chahal v. United Kingdom (1997) 23 EHRR 413; Soering v. United Kingdom (1989) 11 EHRR 439.
  22. Empty citation (help)
  23. "British ministers sanctioned torture of NI internees". The Irish Times. 21 March 2013. Retrieved 30 May 2019.
  24. Aksoy v. Turkey (1997) 23 EHRR 553. The process was referred to by the Court as "Palestinian hanging" but more commonly known as Strappado.
  25. "HUDOC – European Court of Human Rights". hudoc.echr.coe.int.
  26. D. Vitkauskas, G. Dikov (2017). Protecting the Right to a Fair Trial under the European Convention on Human Rights: A Handbook for Legal Practitioners. 2nd Edition. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
  27. 27.0 27.1 Empty citation (help)
  28. Von Hannover v Germany [2004] ECHR 294 (24 June 2004), European Court of Human Rights, para 57
  29. Article 15(3).
  30. Empty citation (help)
  31. Empty citation (help)
  32. In Piermont v. France 27 April 1995, 314 ECHR (series A)
  33. protocol signatory and ratification info, Council of Europe treaties office.
  34. UK Supreme Court, R (on the application of Mott) (Respondent) v Environment Agency (Appellant) (2018) UKSC 10: Press Summary, published 14 February 2018, accessed 28 December 2018