Irregular migration by sea is one of the most apparent contemporary political issues, and one that entails many legal challenges. Human smuggling by sea is only one aspect of irregular migration that represents a particular challenge for States, as sovereignty and security interests clash with the principles and obligations of human rights and refugee law. In dealing with the problem of migrant smuggling by sea, States have conflicting roles, including the protection of national borders, suppressing the smuggling of migrants, rescuing migrants and guarding human rights. |
Article |
The Smuggling of Migrants across the Mediterranean SeaA Human Rights Perspective |
Journal | East European Yearbook on Human Rights, Issue 1 2019 |
Keywords | smuggling, refugees, migration, readmission, interceptions |
Authors | J. Shadi Elserafy LL.M., |
AbstractAuthor's information |
Article |
The Right of Appeal against a Decision on Disciplinary Liability of a Judge |
Journal | East European Yearbook on Human Rights, Issue 1 2019 |
Keywords | disciplinary proceedings, scope of judicial review, standard of judicial review, remedial measures |
Authors | Taras Pashuk PhD |
AbstractAuthor's information |
This article deals with the questions of scope and the standard of judicial review of a disciplinary decision against a judge. It further addresses the issue of remedial powers, which should be granted to the reviewing authority in this type of cases. It is suggested that the scope of judicial review of a disciplinary decision against a judge should extend to questions of law, fact and discretion. What actually varies is the depth of review or, more precisely, the standards of review and the corresponding level of deference, which must be demonstrated to the primary decision-making authority. It is further suggested that there are several factors that have influence on the formation of the standards of review: the institutional, procedural and expertise factors. As to the remedial capacity, the reviewing court should be provided with the competence to apply adequate remedial measures. The reviewing court should be able to effectively eliminate the identified shortcomings in the proceedings before the first-instance authority. For the effective protection of the rights at issue, it may be important for the reviewing court not only to repeal the decision subject to review, but also take other remedial measures. The legitimacy and necessity for applying particular remedial action should be established by taking into account the same institutional, procedural and expertise factors. |
Human Rights Practice Reviews |
The Russian Federation |
Journal | East European Yearbook on Human Rights, Issue 1 2019 |
Authors | Igor Bartsits, Oleg Zaytsev and Kira Sazonova PhD |
Author's information |
Human Rights Literature Reviews |
Estonia |
Journal | East European Yearbook on Human Rights, Issue 1 2019 |
Authors | Ingrid Kauler LLM |
Author's information |
Article |
On Lessons Learned and Yet to Be LearnedReflections on the Lithuanian Cases in the Strasbourg Court’s Grand Chamber |
Journal | East European Yearbook on Human Rights, Issue 1 2019 |
Keywords | human rights, European Convention on Human Rights, European Court of Human Rights, Lithuania |
Authors | Egidijus Kūris |
Abstract |
During the two-and-a-half decades while Lithuania has been a party to the European Convention on Human Rights, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has decided five Lithuanian cases. They all (perhaps but one) raised controversial issues not only of law but also of those pertaining to matters non-legal: psychology, politics, history and so on. There had been follow-ups to most of them, allowing for consideration as to the merits and disadvantages of the respective judgments. These cases are narrated on in their wider-than-legal context and reflected upon from the perspective of their bearing on these issues and of the lessons they taught both to Lithuania, as a respondent State, and to the Court itself. |
Human Rights Practice Reviews |
Albania |
Journal | East European Yearbook on Human Rights, Issue 1 2019 |
Authors | Anisia Mandro LLM |
Author's information |
Article |
Primus Inter Pares? In Search of ‘Fundamental’ Human Rights |
Journal | East European Yearbook on Human Rights, Issue 1 2019 |
Keywords | hierarchy, jus cogens, International Court of Justice, European Court of Human Rights, Inter-American Court of Human Rights |
Authors | Julia Kapelańska-Pręgowska |
AbstractAuthor's information |
International human rights law is one of the most developed and codified regimes (branches) of public international law. Since 1948 and the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the number and scope of human rights standards evolved considerably. Prima facie this tendency reflects a generally positive phenomenon and is driven by the human rights approach in international law, but at the same time it may raise questions of the system’s efficiency, internal coherence, hierarchy of rights and mechanisms of protection and monitoring. Against the richness of human rights standards, designations such as ‘fundamental’, ‘essential’, ‘basic’, ‘crucial’ or ‘core’ are being used and ascribed to diverse concepts (inter alia, customary international human rights, erga omnes obligations, non-derogable rights, jus cogens or absolute rights). The article explores the provisions of general human rights instruments – the UDHR, the two Covenants and regional treaties, as well as relevant case-law of the ICJ, ECtHR and IACtHR in search of a definition and catalogue of fundamental human rights. |