JUDICIAL PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE FIELD OF NATIONAL SECURITY AS A COMPREHENSIVE POLITICAL AND LEGAL INSTITUTE

Authors

  • Denys Chyzhov

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51989/NUL.2022.1.28

Keywords:

human rights, judicial protection, national security, political and legal institution, restriction of individual rights, national interests

Abstract

The article performs a systematic analysis of regulations in the field of judicial protection of human rights to ensure national security. In view of the above, it can be concluded that judicial protection of human rights in the field of national security has the character of a complex political and legal institution, which combines the features of a political and legal institution. Based on the study, we propose to understand the national security system of Ukraine as a holistic political, legal mechanism with its own constituent elements, which together are aimed at solving national problems, protecting vital interests of the individual, state and society in the manner and measures prescribed by law. The novelty of the study is characterized by the fact that the study of judicial protection of human rights in the field of national security was carried out on the basis of examples of ECtHR practice on protection of individual rights and possible restriction of his rights in the interests of national security. The article argues that activities to ensure human rights and national security are twofold: ensuring human rights ensures state security – ensuring state security ensures human rights. A study of the ECtHR’s case-law on the protection of the right to respect for one’s private and family life, one’s home and one’s correspondence revealed the following key points: in order to determine whether a particular violation of Article 8 was “necessary in a democratic society”, the Court Member State with the right of the applicant; in determining whether the contested measures were “necessary in a democratic society”, the Court will take into account whether the evidence adduced in support of them was relevant and sufficient in the light of the case as a whole and the measures themselves proportionate to the legitimate aims pursued; any interference of a state body in the exercise of a person’s right to respect for private life and correspondence must be provided for by law, etc. These provisions indicate a combination of political and legal instruments in the system of protection of individual rights in the field of national security.

References

Антонов В.О. Конституційно-правові засади національної безпеки України : монографія / наук. ред. Ю.С. Шемшученко. Київ : ТАЛКОМ, 2017. 576 с.

Старуха Б. Роль органів державної влади у забезпеченні прав людини і громадянина в демократичному суспільстві: теоретико-правовий вимір : дис. … канд. юрид. наук. Львів, 2016. 180 с.

Державна політика забезпечення національної безпеки України: основні напрямки та особливості здійснення : монографія / М.Ф. Криштанович, Я.Я. Пушак, М.І. Флейчук, В.І. Франчук. Львів : Сполом, 2020. 418 с.

Доронін І.М. Національна безпека України в інформаційну епоху: теоретико-правове дослідження : автореф. дис. … докт. юрид. наук / НДІ інформатики і права НАПрН України. Київ : б. в., 2020. 39 с.

Дроботов С.А. Конституційно-правове забезпечення національної безпеки в україні. Journal «ScienceRise: Juridical Science». 2020. № 2 (12). С. 24–29. doi: https://doi.org/10.15587/2523-4153.2020.210858.

Кубецька О., Остапенко Т., Палешко Я. Умови забезпечення національної безпеки держави. Науковий вісник Дніпропетровського державного університету внутрішніх справ. 2020. № 2. С. 321–327. doi: https://doi.org/10.31733/2078-3566-2020-2-321-327.

Про виконання рішень та застосування практики Європейського суду з прав людини : Закон України від 23.02.2006 № 3477-IV. Урядовий кур’єр. 2006. № 60.

Ivana Roagna Protecting the right to respect for private and family life under the European Convention on Human Rights. Голос України. 2001. № 3. URL: https://rm.coe.int/16806f1554 Конвенції про захист прав людини і основоположних свобод.

CASE OF DUDGEON v. THE UNITED KINGDOM. Application no. 7525/76. JUDGMENT European Court of Human Rights 22 October 1981.

CASE OF PIECHOWICZ v. POLAND. Application no. 20071/07. JUDGMENT European Court of Human Rights 17 April 2012.

CASE OF ANIMAL DEFENDERS INTERNATIONAL v. THE UNITED KINGDOM. Application no. 48876/08. JUDGMENT European Court of Human Rights 22 April 2013.

CASE OF HALFORD v. THE UNITED KINGDOM. Application no. 20605/92. JUDGMENT European Court of Human Rights 25 June 1997.

CASE OF SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM. Application no. 5947/72. JUDGMENT European Court of Human Rights 25 March 1983.

Published

2022-03-31

Issue

Section

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT