FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3205174340> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3205174340 endingPage "92" @default.
• W3205174340 startingPage "72" @default.
• W3205174340 abstract "Interaction of international justice bodies with expert organizations has not been the subject of an analysis performed by legal scholars. Meanwhile, cooperation between the European Commission for Democracy through Law (better known as Venice Commission) and the European Court of Human Rights makes it possible to establish many touch points in their activities. Despite the obvious differences in their status and subject competences both bodies are distinguished by the similarity of methodological approaches as evolutive interpretation of law, doctrine of margin of appreciation, conceptual framework. In the last decade the convergence of legal positions of the European Venice Commission and the European Court has noticeably increased. This is particularly evident in the reports of the Venice Commission and the European Court Grand Chamber’s judgments. The Commission’s 2020 report on individual access to constitutional justice, presented by a former judge of the European Court of Justice and now a member of the Venice Commission, Angelika Nussberger, is an illustrative example of this convergence of the positions of both institutions on the highly sensitive area of public relations. The practice of providing amicus curiae expert opinions by the Commission at the request of the European Court has also become more widespread. Dozens of judgments of the ECHR of the last decade contain lengthy references to the legal positions of the Commission. The article analyzes some of them. The authors conclude that this methodology strengthens the credibility of the reasoning for the Commission’s Opinions and the Court’s judgments. In the judgments of the European Court in cases concerning Russia there are also some references to the legal positions of the Venice Commission. This applies primarily to decisions on the implementation of civil and political rights of citizens. The article also analyses some of the acts of the Commission and the Court that have similar subjects of consideration. The authors conclude that the interaction of the Venice Commission and the European Court provides a unique example of the synergy of judicial interpretation of law and the opinions of the expert community. First of all, these are the issues of the functioning of the justice systems, the participation of citizens in political life, the electoral system, and freedom of speech. Ultimately, both institutions are involved in the realization of the quasi-utopia of creating a common European legal space." @default.
• W3205174340 created "2021-10-25" @default.
• W3205174340 creator A5059945461 @default.
• W3205174340 creator A5087337845 @default.
• W3205174340 date "2021-01-01" @default.
• W3205174340 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W3205174340 title "The Venice Commission and the European Court of Human Rights: common grounds" @default.
• W3205174340 doi "https://doi.org/10.21128/2226-2059-2021-2-72-92" @default.
• W3205174340 hasPublicationYear "2021" @default.
• W3205174340 type Work @default.
• W3205174340 sameAs 3205174340 @default.
• W3205174340 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3205174340 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3205174340 hasAuthorship W3205174340A5059945461 @default.
• W3205174340 hasAuthorship W3205174340A5087337845 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C105639569 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C115314567 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C139621336 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C169437150 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C2776034101 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C2780224610 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConcept C2910001868 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C105639569 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C115314567 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C139621336 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C144024400 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C144133560 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C169437150 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C17744445 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C199539241 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C2776034101 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C2780224610 @default.
• W3205174340 hasConceptScore W3205174340C2910001868 @default.
• W3205174340 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W3205174340 hasLocation W32051743401 @default.
• W3205174340 hasOpenAccess W3205174340 @default.
• W3205174340 hasPrimaryLocation W32051743401 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W1515804215 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W1598008039 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W2079638224 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W2211453632 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W2299835984 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W2612777386 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W2792666550 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W2945842269 @default.
• W3205174340 hasRelatedWork W3167652230 @default.
• W3205174340 hasVolume "11" @default.
• W3205174340 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3205174340 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3205174340 magId "3205174340" @default.
• W3205174340 workType "article" @default.