PDF

OlgaBRYNZANSKA,

Scientific Adviser of the Department of Generalization of Judicial Practice of the Scientific Expert Department of the Supreme Specialized Court of Ukraine for Civil and Criminal Cases, Candidate of Law sciences

CONCEPT OF ARBITRARINESS IN EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICE IN THE CONTEXTS OF DEFENCE OF RIGHT ON LIBERTY

The article is devoted to a concept of arbitrariness in European Court of Human Rights practice for the purposes of Article 5 of European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights (Convention). A notion of «arbitrariness» is formulated: variety of actions and passivity which have been made by authorities according with the letter of national law but with violation of Article 5 Convention. Also this article focuses on the characteristics and ways of arbitrariness, such as, bad faith or deception on the part of the authorities when they don’t informate person about grounds of permitted deprivation of liberty; violation of rule about relationship between the ground of permitted deprivation of liberty and the place and conditions of detention; lawful deprivation of liberty without consideration of ability to appoint other measures that aren’t interlinked with deprivation of liberty. In framework of research author pays attention to general principles of assessment for actions and passivities made by authorities as arbitrariness. The most important of them are: 1) detention will be «arbitrary» in the face of complying with the letter of national law; 2) relationship between the ground of permitted deprivation of liberty relies on and the place and conditions of detention; 3) importance of assessment whether deprivation of liberty was necessary to achieve the stated aim; 4) balance between the importance in democratic society of securing the immediate fulfilment of the obligation in question, and the importance of the right to liberty; 5) detention of an individual is such a serious measure that it is justified only as a last resort where other, less severe measures have been considered and found to be insufficient to safeguard the individual or public interest; 6) importance of legal certainty in any activity on the part of the authorities.

Key words: European Court of Human Rights, arbitrariness, discretionary powers, right on liberty, bad faith or deception on the part of the authorities, legal certainty, law quality.

References

Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. URL: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/ru/995_004. [ukr.]

Academic explanatory dictionary of the Ukrainian language. URL: http://sum.in.ua/s/svavillja. [ukr.]

Online Etymology Dictionary. URL: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=arbitrary4. Oxford advanced learner’s Dictionary. Oxford Press, 1994.[engl.]

Saadi v. The United Kingdom (application no. 1329/03): judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 11 July 2006. Human rights. The case law of the European Court of Human Rights. 2006. No 8. S. 357–377. [engl.]

Amuur v. France (application no. 17/1995/523/609): judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 25 June 1996 URL: http://unhcr.org.ua/img/uploads/Amuur%20vs% 20FranceECHR% [ukr.]20decis_extracts.pdf. [ukr.]

Case of Witold Litwa v. Poland (Application no. 26629/95): European Court of Human Rights, 04.04.2000. URL: hudoc.echr.hudoc.echr.coe.int/webservices/content/pdf/001-58537.[engl.]

Case of Ambruszkiewicz v. Poland (application no. 38797/03): judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 25 June 1996 URL: http://www.scourt.gov.ua/clients/vsu/vsu.nsf/7864c99c437c014/ 895eb1efa4312a8dc22580f8003dfa2d / $ FILE / Ambrushkiewicz v. Poland.pdf. [ukr.]

Case of Hayredinov v. Ukraine (application no. 38717/04): judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 14 October 2010. URL: http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_665. [ukr.]

Case of Mooren v. Germany (No11364/03): European Court of Human Rights, 09.07.2009. URL: hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/?library...id [engl.]

Case of Khudoerov v. Russia (application no. 6847/02): judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 8 November 2005 URL: http://europeancourt.ru/resheniya-evropejskogo-suda-na-russkom-yazyke/xudoerov- against-russia-ruling-of-the-european-court. [russ.]

Case of Ruslan Yakovenko v. Ukraine (application no. 5425/11): judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 4 September 2015 URL: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_a79. [ukr.]

Case of Homullo v. Ukraine (application no. 47593/10): judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 27 November 2014 URL: http://zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_a58. [ukr.]

Case of Chanev v. Ukraine (application no. 46193/13): judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 9 January 2015 URL: http://zakon0.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/974_a37. [ukr.]