Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms as a fundamental instrument of the European law – does this statement still remain valid?

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is often referred as a fundamental instrument of the European law. The following study, through a detailed description of the circumstances of creation of the Convention, its normative content, enforcement mechanism and the current context in which it is in force, seeks to demonstrate whether the above statement remains valid in the current political and legal reality. It is true that in the Convention sovereign states accepted for the first time legal obligations to secure the classical human rights and freedoms and – what is particularly relevant – to allow all individuals to bring applications against the state, leading to a specially founded international judicial body finding them in breach. This was a crucial, revolutionary step in the evolution of the international law that, for centuries, had been based on such deeply entrenched foundations as the ideas that the settlement of the freedoms and rights of individuals was within the domestic jurisdiction of states and that individuals were not subjects of rights in this law. The Convention has thus generated the effective enforcement mechanism in the world, which contribution to the setting of standards for the protection of human rights and freedoms is unrivalled. However, it cannot be lost from one’s sight that currently the presence of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union in the European legal space and the weakness of the Council of Europe, under of which auspices the European Convention on Human Rights was adopted, manifesting itself in the fact that it associates a large number of countries with quite diverse political and legal culture and the standards of democracy, make the practical importance of the Convention be the subject of constant verification.

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania and European Standards of the Right to Court

The purpose of this article is to analyse the constitutional basis for the activity the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania and to represent the functions of this Court in respect of the harmonization of national and transnational defence mechanisms of human right to a fair trial. The article is divided into several basic parts: first of all, it shows the constitutional grounds for the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, the creation and the relevant characteristics of its status and activities; later, the article discusses the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania, which analyses the right to a fair trial; the article ends with an assessment of the impact of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union for the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court while defending the right to a fair trial.

European Convention on Human Rights and Charter of Fundamental  Rights of European Union – compatibility or confrontation

European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms enjoys good opinion of the constitutional act orders European legal space of human rights. The pearl in the Convention crown is European Court of Human Rights, which case-law creates European standards of human rights in contemporary way. Being obligatory, Lisbon Treaty and Charter of Fundamental Rights of European Union change the previous situation. Instrumentarium of the human rights protection in Europe has been enriched. However a number of questions about the relation between Convention and Charter arise and the relation between European Court of Human Rights and Court of Justice of European Union as well as the case-law of both European courts. Are the relations going to be complementary or use confrontation?

The offense against religious feelings expressed in the text of Art. 196 of PC is strongly embedded in the constitutional liberties and freedoms and human rights of both the Council of Europe and the European Union. Freedom of conscience and religion, which originated in the wording of Art. 196 of PC remains in antinomy to other constitutional values protected by both international acts such as freedom of expression, freedom of artistic expression, the freedom to teach and freedom to enjoy cultural heritage. This requires balancing the content of these freedoms. At present stage there is yet no way to resolve the alleged doctrine of countertype of art.