The right to a fair trial - Requirements of impartiality and independence under Articles 14 (1) ICCPR, 8 (1) IACHR and 6 (1) ECHR in relation to milit
-
- Einzelkauf Download ausgewählt
-
Sprache:Englisch
Fr. 29.90
inkl. gesetzl. MwSt.Beschreibung
Produktdetails
Format
Kopierschutz
Nein
Family Sharing
Nein
Text-to-Speech
Nein
Erscheinungsdatum
19.11.2008
Verlag
GRINSeitenzahl
67 (Printausgabe)
Dateigröße
599 KB
Auflage
1. Auflage
Sprache
Englisch
EAN
9783640215966
Master's Thesis from the year 2008 in the subject Law - European and International Law, Intellectual Properties, grade: 4.5 (CH!), University of Bern (Institut für öffentliches Recht), language: English, abstract: It is the aim of this thesis to analyse the framework and relevant case law on requirements of independence and impartiality under Article 14 (1) ICCPR, Article 8 (1) IACHR and Article 6 (1) ECHR in relation to military courts.
One has to bear in mind that most of the judgments discussed were not solely concerned with questions of impartiality and independence, but also with other fundamental rights, thus the paper has to be read in a context and framework of rights entrenched in the respective Convention or Covenant.
Military Courts are not a new phenomenon, they were (and are) a feature of the military system and were originally intended as a tool to uphold a structure which is rooted in vertical influence, thus they have a direct nexus to the executive branch of the state which makes them relatively easy to set up and control on the other hand however, due to their proximity to other branches of the state they can blur the line of the underlying principle - separation of powers -. Several problems spring from the latter aspect[...]. Another problem, which will be also discussed below is that of scrutiny, open courts are subject to public scrutiny whereas military or even partly military courts often lack any form of control. This line of reasoning leads to two characteristical groups of cases, firstly cases involving civilians which are trialled by a military court often in relation to state security issues, the other problem is that of impunity where members of the military sit trial over comrades often resulting in an impunity verdict.
Bearing these two groups of cases in mind an approach was taken, first to set out the relevant international legal framework and principles on independence and impartiality, the next part will then, building on the former, analyse the state reports and case law. In doing so it will be shown, in how far the different controlling bodies have developed
the requirements of independence and impartiality up to the current date and have found consensus in areas i.e. trial of civilians before military courts but differ in their approach to prevent the latter.
After a first overview of the case law it became clear that the gravest interference with the fair trial right has occurred in South America, having said this, at the core of this paper is the analysis of case law before the Inter American Commission of Human Rights and the Inter American Court.
One has to bear in mind that most of the judgments discussed were not solely concerned with questions of impartiality and independence, but also with other fundamental rights, thus the paper has to be read in a context and framework of rights entrenched in the respective Convention or Covenant.
Military Courts are not a new phenomenon, they were (and are) a feature of the military system and were originally intended as a tool to uphold a structure which is rooted in vertical influence, thus they have a direct nexus to the executive branch of the state which makes them relatively easy to set up and control on the other hand however, due to their proximity to other branches of the state they can blur the line of the underlying principle - separation of powers -. Several problems spring from the latter aspect[...]. Another problem, which will be also discussed below is that of scrutiny, open courts are subject to public scrutiny whereas military or even partly military courts often lack any form of control. This line of reasoning leads to two characteristical groups of cases, firstly cases involving civilians which are trialled by a military court often in relation to state security issues, the other problem is that of impunity where members of the military sit trial over comrades often resulting in an impunity verdict.
Bearing these two groups of cases in mind an approach was taken, first to set out the relevant international legal framework and principles on independence and impartiality, the next part will then, building on the former, analyse the state reports and case law. In doing so it will be shown, in how far the different controlling bodies have developed
the requirements of independence and impartiality up to the current date and have found consensus in areas i.e. trial of civilians before military courts but differ in their approach to prevent the latter.
After a first overview of the case law it became clear that the gravest interference with the fair trial right has occurred in South America, having said this, at the core of this paper is the analysis of case law before the Inter American Commission of Human Rights and the Inter American Court.
Noch keine Bewertungen vorhanden
Verfassen Sie die erste Bewertung zu diesem Artikel
Helfen Sie anderen Kundinnen und Kunden durch Ihre Meinung.