BLANKET BANS IN CASE LAW OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA

被引:0
作者
Kucs, Arturs [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Latvia, Riga, Latvia
来源
NEW LEGAL REALITY: CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES. II | 2022年
关键词
blanket bans; European Court of Human rights; Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia; STRASBOURG;
D O I
10.22364/iscflul.8.2.25
中图分类号
D9 [法律]; DF [法律];
学科分类号
0301 ;
摘要
Irrespective of whether a human rights case is being decided in a national or international court, similar methodology is used when assessing whether a human rights restriction is justifiable. In some cases, however, the European Court of Human Rights and Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia use different approach for specific kind of human rights restriction the blanket ban. This concept and applied methodology are still under the discussion regarding both courts. This article looks into concept of blanket ban, analyses influence of this concept to courts' assessment, as well as reflects objections to the concept.
引用
收藏
页码:369 / 379
页数:11
相关论文
共 23 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], ECHR judgment of 6 October 2005 in Case Hirst v. the United Kingdom
  • [2] [Anonymous], ECHR judgment of 6 January 2011 in Case Paksas v. Lithuania
  • [3] [Anonymous], ECHR judgment of 10 April 2007 in Case Evans v. the United Kingdom
  • [4] [Anonymous], 2019, Dissenting opinion of judge of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia Aldis Lavins
  • [5] [Anonymous], 2021, Judgment of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia
  • [6] [Anonymous], ECHR judgment of 8 September 2014 in Case National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers v. the United Kingdom
  • [7] [Anonymous], ECHR judgment of 22 April 2013 in Case Animal Defenders International v. the United Kingdom
  • [8] [Anonymous], 2017, Dissenting opinion of judge of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Latvia Aldis Lavins of 8 December 2017 in CaseNo
  • [9] [Anonymous], 2013, PROT NO 15 AM CONV P
  • [10] [Anonymous], Dissenting opinion of judges Wildhaber, Costa, Lorenzen, Kovler and Jebens of 6 October 2005 in ECHR Case Hirst v. the United Kingdom