Pagrindinių teisių apsauga pagal Europos žmogaus teisių konvenciją ir Europos Sąjungos teisę

LTStraipsnis skirtas aptarti pagrindinių teisių apsaugą pagal Europos žmogaus teisių konvenciją ir Europos Sąjungos teisę, ypač šių dviejų sistemų garantuojamą žmogaus teisių apsaugos lygį, bei aptarti ES teisės santykį su Europos žmogaus teisių konvencijos sistema. Labai svarbu tai, kad Europos Žmogaus Teisių Teismas net įvairių procedūrų ES institucijose požiūriu laikosi nuostatos, kad tokių procedūrų garantijos atitinka Konvencijos 6 straipsnio teismines procesines garantijas. Šie klausimai yra ypač aktualūs dabar, kai Europos Sąjunga, 2009 m. gruodžio 1 d. įsigaliojus Lisabonos sutarčiai ir 2010 m. birželio 1 d. Konvenciją papildžiusiam Keturioliktajam protokolui, numato teisines Europos Sąjungos prisijungimo prie Konvencijos sistemos galimybes. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Europos Teisingumo Teismas; Europos Žmogaus Teisių Teismas (European Court of Human Rights); Europos žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių apsaugos konvencija (European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms); Jurisprudencijų santykis; Žmogaus teisės; Court of Justice of the European Communities/European Union; European Convention on Human Rights; European Court of Human Rights; Human rights; Relationship between the case-laws.

ENThe system of the European Convention on Human Rights (the Convention) created in 1950 is still regarded as the most important and effective regional system for the protection of human rights in the whole world. However, the experience of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has clearly showed that the steady growth in the number of cases brought before the ECHR makes it increasingly difficult to keep the length of proceedings within the acceptable limits and to maintain the effectiveness of the ECHR. This aspect is becoming extremely important due to the fact that the European Union (EU) will join the Convention system in the near future. The legal basis for the EU accession to the Convention system has been made possible after the entering into force of the EU Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009, and, from the Convention’s perspective, the new Protocol No. 14 to the Convention, which entered into force on 1 June 2010, and which, in Article 17 (amending Article 59 of the Convention), stipulates that the EU may accede to this Convention. It should be emphasized that further modifications to the Convention are necessary in order to make such accession possible from a legal and technical point of view. Those modifications could be brought either through an amending protocol to the Convention or by means of an accession treaty to be concluded between the EU and the State Parties to the Convention. All aspects of the possible accession will be decided during the proceedings of negotiation between the EU and the Council of Europe.The relationship between the case-law of two different international courts - the ECHR and the EU courts - can already be seen today. If in the earlier stages some differences in the application of the same human rights were remarkable, (see case No. 374/87 Orkem v. Commission [1989] ECR 3283 and case Funke v. France (Appl. no. 10828/84, judgement of 15 February 1993, § 44)) when the ECHR and the Court of Justice differently interpreted the right to remain silent and to not contribute to incriminating oneself (see also the new case Bykov v. Russia [GC], (No. 4378/02, § 93)), in the case Bosphorus Hava Yollari Turizm v. Tocaret Anonim Sirketi v. Ireland (Appl. no. 45036/98; [GC], judgement of 30 June 2005, CEDH 2005-VI) it is seen that the ECHR has developed the principle of equivalent protection of human rights with regard to both systems. The same position of the ECHR with regard to the EU law was developed in the admissibility decisions in the cases Boivin v. 34 States Members of the Council of Europe (No. 73250/01, 9 September 2008, Decision on the admissibility, CEDH 2008-....) and Connolly v. 15 States members of the European Union (No. 73274/01, 9 December 2008, Decision on the admissibility not published), rejecting the cases as inadmissible ratione personae under Article 1 of the Convention. The developed principle of equivalent protection in both systems should form the legal basis for the future co-operation and unique interpretation of the provisions of the Convention and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights which now forms the legal basis for the protection of human rights in the EU. [text from author]