CONFLICT BETWEEN LEGAL OPINIONS OF ECHR AND NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS
The object of research is a relationship between ECHR and constitutional courts in various jurisdictions.The main aim of this article is to research the conflict between opinions of ECHR and national Constitutional courts, and also to find the root of this conflict.The methodology of this research c...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Russian |
| Published: |
Dostoevsky Omsk State University
2018-01-01
|
| Series: | Правоприменение |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://enforcement.omsu.ru/jour/article/view/133 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850041630076174336 |
|---|---|
| author | Y. Nadtochey |
| author_facet | Y. Nadtochey |
| author_sort | Y. Nadtochey |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The object of research is a relationship between ECHR and constitutional courts in various jurisdictions.The main aim of this article is to research the conflict between opinions of ECHR and national Constitutional courts, and also to find the root of this conflict.The methodology of this research consists of universal methods (such as analysis, synthesis, comparison) and jurisprudence-specific methods.In the course of research, the author used various theoretical sources, ECHR case-law and decisions of various national Constitutional Courts.Results. At this point of time, there are many theories that try to explain the relationship between international and national law. But their functioning can be observed only in practice. Many jurisdictions adhere to the concept of Dualism.National Constitutional courts may perceive legal opinions in two different ways: adhere to the legal opinion of ECHR or reach a different conclusion, different to that of ECHR.Because national Constitutional courts and ECHR employ different systems for establishing whether rights of the claimant were violated or not, courts may give more weight to the different factors.In the article, the author focuses attention on such reason of the conflict as justification for limitation of one's rights.Conclusions. Conflict of legal opinions of ECHR and national Constitutional courts is of axiological nature. Conflict per se does not imply that a given national government decided to breach its international obligations. Because of subsidiary nature of ECHR protection, conflicts is rather an exception that could be dealt with than a rule. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-f0a6837ffa474802bfc3b38d4bfa2d40 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2542-1514 2658-4050 |
| language | Russian |
| publishDate | 2018-01-01 |
| publisher | Dostoevsky Omsk State University |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Правоприменение |
| spelling | doaj-art-f0a6837ffa474802bfc3b38d4bfa2d402025-08-20T02:55:44ZrusDostoevsky Omsk State UniversityПравоприменение2542-15142658-40502018-01-011415816510.24147/2542-1514.2017.1(4).158-165109CONFLICT BETWEEN LEGAL OPINIONS OF ECHR AND NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURTSY. Nadtochey0St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, RussiaThe object of research is a relationship between ECHR and constitutional courts in various jurisdictions.The main aim of this article is to research the conflict between opinions of ECHR and national Constitutional courts, and also to find the root of this conflict.The methodology of this research consists of universal methods (such as analysis, synthesis, comparison) and jurisprudence-specific methods.In the course of research, the author used various theoretical sources, ECHR case-law and decisions of various national Constitutional Courts.Results. At this point of time, there are many theories that try to explain the relationship between international and national law. But their functioning can be observed only in practice. Many jurisdictions adhere to the concept of Dualism.National Constitutional courts may perceive legal opinions in two different ways: adhere to the legal opinion of ECHR or reach a different conclusion, different to that of ECHR.Because national Constitutional courts and ECHR employ different systems for establishing whether rights of the claimant were violated or not, courts may give more weight to the different factors.In the article, the author focuses attention on such reason of the conflict as justification for limitation of one's rights.Conclusions. Conflict of legal opinions of ECHR and national Constitutional courts is of axiological nature. Conflict per se does not imply that a given national government decided to breach its international obligations. Because of subsidiary nature of ECHR protection, conflicts is rather an exception that could be dealt with than a rule.https://enforcement.omsu.ru/jour/article/view/133european court of human rightsconstitutional courtlegal opinionsjustificationconflict of opinions |
| spellingShingle | Y. Nadtochey CONFLICT BETWEEN LEGAL OPINIONS OF ECHR AND NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS Правоприменение european court of human rights constitutional court legal opinions justification conflict of opinions |
| title | CONFLICT BETWEEN LEGAL OPINIONS OF ECHR AND NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS |
| title_full | CONFLICT BETWEEN LEGAL OPINIONS OF ECHR AND NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS |
| title_fullStr | CONFLICT BETWEEN LEGAL OPINIONS OF ECHR AND NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS |
| title_full_unstemmed | CONFLICT BETWEEN LEGAL OPINIONS OF ECHR AND NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS |
| title_short | CONFLICT BETWEEN LEGAL OPINIONS OF ECHR AND NATIONAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS |
| title_sort | conflict between legal opinions of echr and national constitutional courts |
| topic | european court of human rights constitutional court legal opinions justification conflict of opinions |
| url | https://enforcement.omsu.ru/jour/article/view/133 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ynadtochey conflictbetweenlegalopinionsofechrandnationalconstitutionalcourts |