Право на образование в фокусе международного сотрудничества: пособие для прагматика
This article is a review of recommendations of the UN expert mechanisms on the implementation of the right to education in Russia from a pragmatic point of view. It aims to present these recommendations as a legal tool that can be used by stakeholders to improve the legal status of participants in educational relations and the education system as a whole.
This book seeks to provide a panorama of the issues arising from pluralism in the education system and of judicial responses to them around the globe. In it, thirty-four authors representing many different legal cultures have selected and commented the most significant judicial decisions in each of the jurisdictions analysed. The topics addressed include religious and cultural symbols; faith-based, religious, and citizenship education; freedom of teaching and scientific freedom; homeschooling; authorization, funding and other matters concerning denominational and private schools, among other legal disputes. The reader will easily sense many different ideological orientations throughout the book’s thirty-seven chapters, which is only the result of pluralism itself and of scientific freedom. Nevertheless, the editors believe that all of the authors have inherently favoured the desire to understand the challenges of pluralism and to convey knowledge that is relevant for a public debate rather than defending their own particular point of view. Indeed, facilitating debate might be considered to be the best achievement of a publication of this kind. The book is divided into six parts. The introductory part features a chapter by the editors concerning the implementation and justiciability of the right to education, and a second chapter by Prof. Charles L. Glenn providing an in-depth historical essay on the importance of debates over religion and education. The five remaining parts reflect a geographical division: Part II includes two chapters on international human rights bodies (the European Court of Human Rights and the United Nations Human Rights Committee); parts III to VI group national courts’ decisions by region: Europe, the Americas, Africa, and lastly Asia and Australia.
The Chapter on Russia deals with the particularities of decision-making methodology used by the Supreme Court of Russia, in comparison with that of the US Supreme Court. It offers an overview of the Russian Supreme Court jurisdiction, justiciability and standing and the main issues arising in these areas.
This monograph is dedicated to both theoretical and practical problems of joint application of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law norms in armed conflicts. Special emphasis is made on the contradictions between norms of both branches of International Law in the sphere of protection of right to life and right to liberty. Conclusions made by the author are based on the analysis of norms of International Law, practice of their application by international organizations and states, decisions of the International Court of Justice, The UN Human Rights Committee, The European Court of Human Rights, The Inter-American Commission and Court of Human Rights, The African Commission on Human' and Peoples' Rights, international and mixed criminal courts and tribunals, as well as legal literature.
In case of emergency state authorities are more inclined to abuse their powers and authority, so the international community created a complex system of application for derogation, which has its own features in every international treaty for the protection of human rights. Moreover, there are only general expressions in the texts of international treaties, while the necessary interpretation of legal derogation from the obligations is contained in the acts of international human rights bodies (in judicial decisions, as well as interpretations, such as the General Comment of the United Nations Human Rights Committee). This article analyses different approaches of the international bodies to the regulation of derogation of human rights during states of emergency.
МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЕ ПРАВО ПРАВ ЧЕЛОВЕКА, ОТСТУПЛЕНИЯ ОТ ОБЯЗАТЕЛЬСТВ, ЗАЩИТА ПРАВ ЧЕЛОВЕКА, ЧРЕЗВЫЧАЙНОЕ ПОЛОЖЕНИЕ, INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW, DEROGATION, PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, STATE OF EMERGENCY
This chapter contains four important cases of the Supreme Court of Russia dealing with finding the right balance between freedom of religion and the right to education. In particular, these are rulings on regional regulations prescribing school uniform for secular state educational institutions, on compulsory subject in public schools curriculum ‘Basics of religious culture and secular ethics’, on the right to establish private religious schools and on the right to set up Sunday schools without license.
From the creation of the International Human Rights Law its relationship with the International Humanitarian Law which emerged earlier faced many changes. These changes can be divided into 3 periods. The first period (1945 - middle of 60-ties) was characterized by denial of the regulating impact of the International Human Rights Law on the relationship between parties in armed conflicts. The second period started in the middle of 60-ties and consisted in acknowledgement of parallel application of both branches of International Law. The third period, which began in 2005, is connected with recognition of a possibility of integration of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law.