Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  protection of rights
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

CONSTITUTIONAL STATUS AND CRIMINAL LAW PROTECTION OF THE RIGHTS OF NATIONAL MINORITIES AND ETHNIC GROUPS IN THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC

100%
Vyrostko M., Palúš I.
Central European Papers
|
2023
|
vol. 11
|
issue 1
47-61
EN
The matter and significance of the issue of the rights of national minorities belongs not only to the traditional subject matter of legal and socio-political sciences, but due to its legislative anchoring and actual implementation, it is included among topics that are often problematic, or have a controversial interpretation, which is manifested in plurality, or rather in the difference of opinion on their essence and meaning. However, lawyers, political scientists, sociologists, and also politicians agree on one thing – the rights of national minorities and ethnic groups are subject to constitutional regulation in the domestic environment, they are part of the constitution as the basic law of a democratic state. In this indicated sense, the concept of their constitutional adjustment can be understood in two directions. In general sense – when the status of national minorities and ethnic groups can be characterized as part of the constitutional principles of fundamental rights and freedoms; and in the specific sense – when constitutions grant national minorities and ethnic groups certain specific rights linked to their nationality, or ethnicity (Fridrich, 2013).
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Koncept advocatus fisci. Uwagi na marginesie książki Bronisława W. Sitka „Wybrane systemy prawnej i instytucjonalnej ochrony praw i interesów państwa”

75%
Dębiński A.
Studia Prawnicze KUL
|
2021
|
issue 2
339-348
EN
The aim of the article is to analyse a monographic study entitled Selected Systems of Legaland Institutional Protection of Rights and of the Interests of the State, written by Bronisław Włodzimierz Sitek and published by the Difin publishing house in 2020. Apart from the introduction and conclusion, the work consists of eight chapters, out of which the first one is devoted to the solutions implemented in the times of the Imperium Romanum. Subsequent chapters provide analysis on the selected systems of protecting the state, with regard to Poland, Austria, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, Germany, and the USA. Simultaneously, the historical development of said systems are also discussed. The analysed monographic study has been deemed useful for people interested in issues related to the maxim of Roman law Salus rei publicae suprema lex esto (The safety of the state is the supreme law).
PL
Artykuł ma celu analizę monografii Wybrane systemy prawnej i instytucjonalnej ochrony praw i interesów państwa autorstwa Bronisława Włodzimierza Sitka, wydaną w 2020 r. przez Wydawnictwo Difin. Praca ta, obok wstępu i wniosków końcowych, składa się z ośmiu rozdziałów, z których pierwszy poświęcony jest rozwiązaniom wprowadzonym w czasach Imperium Romanum. Kolejne rozdziały stanowią omówienie wybranych systemów ochrony państwa, tj. polskiego, austriackiego, włoskiego, hiszpańskiego, szwajcarskiego, niemieckiego oraz USA, z równoczesnym omówieniem ich historycznego rozwoju. Analizowana monografia oceniona została jako przydatna dla osób zainteresowanych zagadnieniami łączącymi się z rzymską paremią Salus rei publicae suprema lex esto.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Grupa jednostek jako podmiot poszukujący ochrony w postępowaniu przed ETPC. Koncepcja ochrony praw grup wrażliwych

65%
Domańska M.
Studia Prawnicze
|
2019
|
issue 1 (217)
27-47
EN
Article 34 ECHR sets forth criteria for the admissibility of individual applications to the European Court of Human Rights but it also states that applications can be submitted by a group of individuals who claim to be a victim of a violation of rights enshrined in the Convention or one of the protocols to it.The aim of the article is to analyze of the Court’s jurisprudence which confirm that the protection of the rights of a group of individuals may also result from a decision of the Tribunal issued in an individual case if only applicant proves that he is a member of a vulnerable group and the whole group require the same protection. It is important, that the vulnerable group and its members must be identified by a set of characteristics criteria and by common circumstances in which their rights have been violated.
PL
Artykuł 34 EKPC określa kryteria dopuszczalności wniesienia przez jednostkę skargi do Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka, ale stanowi również, że skarga może być wniesiona przez grupę jednostek, które twierdzą, że są ofiarą naruszenia praw zawartych w Konwencji lub w jednym z Protokołów do Konwencji. Celem artykułu jest analiza orzecznictwa Trybunału, które potwierdza, że ochrona praw grup jednostek może również wynikać z orzeczenia Trybunału wydanego w indywidualnej sprawie, jeżeli tylko wnioskodawca udowodni, że jest członkiem danej grupy wrażliwej i cała grupa wymaga przyznania takiej samej ochrony. Ważne jest, aby wrażliwa grupa i jej członkowie byli identyfikowani przez pryzmat charakterystycznych kryteriów oraz wspólnych okoliczności, w których ich prawa zostały naruszone.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Jurisdiction of the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union and Its Role in the Development of the Eurasian Legal Order: One Step Back and Two Steps Forward

63%
Mikhaliova T.
Polish Yearbook of International Law
|
2019
|
vol. 39
251-264
EN
The Court of the Eurasian Economic Union was created in 2015 as a judicial organ with jurisdiction over a range of subject matters within the Eurasian Economic Union. It replaced the Court of the Eurasian Economic Community, which operated within the Eurasian Economic Community and its Customs Union (2012-2014). Though the Union become the next step in the integration process of the post-Soviet area, the newly created Court has not been given de jure a successor status. The Court of the Union was set up anew as one of the four institutional bodies in the structure of the Union. It was empowered to settle disputes between the Member States, as well as to consider different types of actions brought by private actors (economic entities only). The interpretative function of the Court was enshrined as “competence on clarification.” Moreover, the Commission, the main executive and regulative organ, was not given locus standi in actions against the Member States to enhance their compliance with the obligations of EAEU law. Preliminary jurisdiction was also cut down as compared to the Court of the Community or other regional integration courts. However, some new functions were given to the Court, and its five years long practice shows a clear tendency to substitute missing powers with those given but in a broader context, as well as its aspirations to play a consolidating role for the legal order of the Union.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.