The right to privacy in medical legal relations in the practice of the European court of human rights: Experience for Ukraine.

This article examines the influence of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights on the development of the civil procedural law of Ukraine and the practice of applying its norms by domestic courts. The concept and essence of the precedent nature of decisions (decisions) of the European Court of Human Rights, their place in the system of so-called "judicial sources" of civil procedural law are defined. The shortcomings of the Law of Ukraine "On the implementation of decisions and application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights" are indicated, which recognizes the practice of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of law and the position of domestic courts regarding this deficiency.
 It is noted that the source of law according to the Law of Ukraine "On the Execution of Decisions and Application of the Practice of the European Court of Human Rights" is also the practice of the European Commission on Human Rights and its role in the procedure for considering complaints about violations of the Convention is determined.
 The directions of the influence of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights on civil proceedings are outlined, where it is concluded that a precedent can be formed on any procedural issue due to the dynamic interpretation by the specified court of the provisions of the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 and its protocols . It is noted that the practice of the European Court of Human Rights generally constructs legal ideas regarding the principles of civil procedure and the right to a fair trial. On the example of a separate decision of the European Court of Human Rights, the law enforcement and regulatory influence on the results of consideration and resolution of a civil case and the development of the civil procedural law of Ukraine, respectively, are analyzed. The importance of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights for the civil justice of Ukraine is summarized. In particular, taking into account the precedent practice of the ECtHR during the consideration and resolution of civil cases will eliminate the factors that serve as the reason for the appeal to the Court and will introduce European standards of protection of human rights and freedoms into Ukrainian civil proceedings. As a result, the impact of the decisions of the ECtHR will reduce the need to appeal to an international judicial institution in search of just satisfaction, which will accelerate the protection of the rights and freedoms of the parties to a civil case within the framework of national judicial jurisdiction.

The urgency of the issue of human rights implementation is determined by its permanent nature. Human rights ensuring has become not only a moral imperative, but also a key indicator of the countries' development and their readiness to cooperate in the international arena. Human rights implementation is an important component of any democratic society. The level of freedom and justice within society depends on how efficiency human rights are implemented. The European Court of Human Rights activity, the practice of which is recognized as a source of national law, is of particular importance. The purpose of the study is to cover the practice of the European Court of Human Rights as a factor in improving the human rights provision in Ukraine. It is emphasized that the practice of the European Court of Human Rights is considered as having a precedent nature, although the system of decisions of the Strasbourg Court does not have formal features characteristic of "classical” precedent law. It is indicated that the European Court of Human Rights practice can influence national law in several ways: the use of legal provisions formulated by the European Court of Human Rights by national courts; interpretation by national public authorities of the norms of national legislation through legal provisions formulated by the European Court of Human Rights; amending national legislation in accordance with the practice of the European Court of Human Rights; development of the human rights doctrine. It is emphasized that the decisions of the Court are binding for all member states, parties to the Convention. Therefore, national judicial authorities are also obliged to apply the legal provisions set forth in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in cases where they concern the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. It is summarized that the European Court of Human Rights practice is a crucial factor in the development of domestic law, contributing to the improvement of the human rights implementation. The practice of the European Court of Human Rights influences the formation and development of national legislation. In the case that national legislation does not meet international standards, the decision of the European Court of Human Rights may encourage the state to amend its legal acts to meet convention standards.

The urgency of the issue studied is stipulated by the need to understand the state of human rights in health care implementation through an analysis of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights The purpose of the study is to clarify understanding of the content of human rights in the field of health care by the European Court of Human Rights (following the Court's practice on Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) and to identify ways of improving these rights. The main approach to research on the issue of human rights protection in the field of health care is to systematically analyze the practice of the European Court of Human Rights.
 The expediency of adopting a separate protocol to Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the subject matter of which will be human rights in the field of health care, which can be an effective means of protecting human rights in the field of health care, is indicated.

1. Introduction 1.1 Introduce the Problem Right of protection from arbitrary interference with personal and family life is conserved with major multipurpose international law acts in effect at the relevant time in the area of human rights protection: Art. 12 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, Art. 17 of The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966. This right is also protected at the level of regional international organizations, i.a. Council of Europe. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 1950 is one of key international acts created within the framework of Council of Europe (hereinafter referred to as--the European Convention on Human Rights, European Convention, the Convention). Art. 8 of the Convention (item 1) guarantees everyone the right to respect for private and family life, Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his (the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950). The European Convention established the unique mechanism of human rights and freedoms protection that foremost involves practice of European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter referred to as--ECtHR, the European Court, the Court). According to Overview data of 1959-2014, the European Court rendered 1085 judgments on complaints about violation of Art.8 of the European Convention by State Parties to the Convention from 1959 to 2014. Most violations of Art.8 of the Convention over the specified period (with regard to time necessary for state accession to the Convention) were established against Italy (145 decrees), Russia (131 decrees), Poland (103 decrees). Given this, ECtHR adopted 17754 regulations in total over the specified period, among them 14877 involved at least one infringement of the European Convention (European Court of Human Rights, 2015). The above states that protection of the right to respect for private and family life is significant on the part of Council of Europe member states' citizens and holds a prominent place in ECtHR practice. The research objective is to cover issues regarding opportunities and matters of protection of the right to respect for private and family life with the use of the European Convention monitoring mechanism. It should be mentioned the paper considers the practice of the European Court in the context of protection of private and family life with no regard to respect for home and correspondence that are also guaranteed under Art. 8 of the Convention. Meeting the objective defined statement and solution of the following tasks: to examine the notion of private and family life in the European court practice, to research European court's legal views concerning understanding of admissibility criteria of interference to the right to respect for private and family life, to study ecological rights protection in the context of Art. 8 of the Convention. In the course of paper preparation scientists' works dedicated both to universal mechanisms of international law protection of human rights and human rights protection under the European Convention in general as well as rights to respect for private and family life in particular were studied. Findings of the research develop and complement international and European law sections dedicated to human rights protection. They can be used in different kinds of legal practice, in academic activity when teaching various branches of jurisprudence. 1.2 Importance of the Problem Modern legal science pays much attention to human rights protection, but there are few complex researches devoted to protection of the right to respect for private and family life in European Court of Human Rights. Recently a research dedicated to the right to respect for private and family life and inviolability of home and correspondence has been undertaken (as exemplified by European Court of Human Rights practice) in Russian legal science (Gracheva, 2013). …

Guaranteed by the Constitution of Ukraine and Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, the right to respect for private and family life for those sentenced to life imprisonment, in terms of its implementation and scope, differs from this right for free individuals. But it is undeniable that those sentenced to life imprisonment are not deprived of this right in full. This is consistently emphasized in its practice by the European Court of Human Rights. In addition to private and family life being a natural need of every individual, its realization, particularly in forms such as maintaining and supporting connections with the outside world, is a means of re-socialization for individuals undergoing punishment in the form of life imprisonment. The benchmark for the development of Ukrainian legislation and law enforcement practice is the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. Therefore, the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the right to respect for private and family life for those sentenced to life imprisonment should be studied and generalized. The precondition for the further development of any scientific direction is the comprehension of what has already been done by previous researchers. The conducted research has shown that Ukrainian scientific literature has addressed the legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding various aspects of the right to respect for the private and family life of prisoners, broadly understood (including those in custody, sentenced to a certain term of imprisonment, and those sentenced to life imprisonment): 1) the conclusion that the restriction of the right to respect for private and family life for persons deprived of liberty, provided it is lawful, is not incompatible with the Convention; 2) the conditions/criteria for the legality of such restriction, implemented by national authorities; 3) the systematic identification of the main types of violations of the right to respect for family life recorded in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding convicted persons and persons in custody; 4) special protection of correspondence between an inmate and their lawyer; 5) differentiation of the spheres of application of Article 8 with other articles of the Convention, primarily Article 3; 6) determination of the main trend in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights «in the penitentiary sphere and in the criminal justice system as a whole,» which consists of constantly raising the standards of human rights by the Court; 7) ignoring the need for an individual approach in applying restrictions on the rights of persons deprived of liberty. The analysis of the existing body of scientific literature shows that existing studies are mainly based on the analysis of the European Court of Human Rights practice regarding foreign states and, with one exception, do not distinguish the legal status of those sentenced to life imprisonment among other deprived individuals. Since the publication of the analyzed monographs, 9–10 years have passed. During this time, the European Court of Human Rights has developed a significant body of practice regarding Ukraine, taking into account the Ukrainian context. Therefore, the analysis of the European Court of Human Rights decisions specifically regarding Ukraine should be a priority. Additionally, they should be analyzed in full. Such an analysis will allow, in conjunction with demonstrating the Convention’s standards regarding the right of those sentenced to life imprisonment to respect for their private and family life, to show the systematic and partial problems in this area identified by the European Court of Human Rights in its practice regarding Ukraine.

У статті розглядається значення рішень Європейського суду з прав людини у механізмі запобігання домашньому насильству. Вказується, що національне кримінальне процесуальне законодавство не було адаптовано та приведено у відповідність міжнародним правовим документам, а також позиції Європейського суду з прав людини. Зазначається, що не дивлячись на те, що в ст. 17 Закону України «Про виконання рішень та застосування практики Європейського суду з прав людини», визначено, що суди застосовують при розгляді справ Конвенцію та практику Суду як джерело права, національне законодавство не надає визначення поняттю «практика Європейського суду з прав людини», що призводить до формування різних доктринальних та практичних позицій з цього питання. Зазначене надає можливість ігнорувати окремі рішення Суду як у межах судового розгляду, так і під час законотворчої роботи. Це має наслідком різне тлумачення правових норм, а отже – прогалини у механізмі правозастосування, що дестабілізує процес правового забезпечення системи запобігання кримінальним правопорушенням. Прикладом є віднесення домашнього насильства до категорії кримінальних правопорушень, кримінальне провадження щодо яких здійснюється у формі приватного обвинувачення. Підсумовується, що рішення Європейського суду з прав людини в межах спеціально-кримінологічного запобігання кримінальним правопорушенням мають формально-юридичне значення, оскільки вони не є імперативними, часто зумовлені рішеннями, ухваленими в умовах судової дискреції та de jure є актами правозастосування та правотлумачення положень Європейської конвенції з прав людини. Водночас такі рішення утворюють апробовану платформу для удосконалення організаційно- правових заходів протидії злочинності через формування курсу розвитку кримінально-правової політики.

Introduction. Judges are required to observe certain rules of conduct, some of which can be considered as interference in the sphere of private life. Because of this, the issues of defining the boundaries of the judge’s private life and the possibility of violating them are very relevant. The European Court of Human Rights has a certain practice of protecting the right to respect for private life in relation to judges. This article is devoted to its research. Theoretical Basis. Methods. When writing the article, the authors studied scientific works on the problems of judicial ethics, standards of behavior of public servants, protection of the right to respect for private and family life, and the relationship between private life and public service. The main attention is paid to the practice of the European Court of Human Rights in the context of protecting the private life of judges. Results. The understanding of the private life of a judge based on the practice of the European Court of Human Rights is studied. The approaches applied to the assessment of such violations are considered. The criteria for the permissibility of state interference in the right to respect the private life of a judge are studied. Discussion and Conclusion. In accordance with the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, the sphere of a judge’s private life is interpreted broadly, including professional activities. To identify interference in the private life of a judge, it is important to analyze his behavior in terms of the requirements imposed on him, the consequences of interference for himself or his close circle. A key role in assessing the permissibility of interference, taking into account the criteria of legality, legitimate purpose, and necessity in a democratic society, should be assigned to establishing a fair balance of public and private interests.

The article is devoted to the issues of reproductive human rights in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights and their impact on the practice of law enforcement and constitutional-legal doctrine in Ukraine. It emphasizes that personal reproductive rights are an important element of the system of fundamental human rights. Judicial practice, including the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, has a significant impact on the regulation and implementation of reproductive rights. A priority area for the development of Ukrainian legislation is the study of the possibilities of using judicial practice in the fiel of protection and safeguarding reproductive rights. A key issue in this regard is the scope of the regulating influence of precedential rulings concerning reproductive rights, as reflected in the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. It is noted that referring to this practice is becoming a common legal practice among participants in judicial and administrative procedures. At the same time, a problem arises in applying judicial practice to relationships that are not independently regulated by law in Ukraine due to the absence of a separate legal act governing assisted reproductive technologies. It is emphasized that such a national legal act should adhere to the principles outlined in the precedential decisions of the European Court of Human Rights related to reproductive rights. The current law enforcement practice of the European Court of Human Rights demonstrates its use of a well-developed methodology for interpretation based on the consensus (legal harmonization) method, i.e., combining the interpretation of international acts and agreements with the practice of member states’ national legal systems. At the same time, the analysis of constitutional interpretations reflected in national legal systems is also important. At the level of constitutional-legal doctrine, it becomes important to form theoretical approaches to understanding the interpretative mechanisms for applying the precedent law of the European Court of Human Rights, specifically in the area of reproductive rights.

The article explores the main problems of the application by the national courts of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights as a source of law. Analyzing the rules of the law and examining the views of the Supreme Court have highlighted the problematic issues of the obligation to apply the case law of the European Court of Human Rights to national courts as a source of law. The researchers' positions on the obligation of national courts to apply the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in cases against other states are examined and the importance of the application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights is highlighted. Analyzing the views of scholars and experts, we have proposed ways to address the issues of the binding application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights by reviewing the plenary sessions of high courts. The problems of the application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights by national courts, such as the selective application of the case law of the Court, references to general principles and interpretations, ignoring the conditions of their application, absolutization of the binding position of the Court, application of the decisions of the Court by analogy, reference to the practice Court in the presence of clear and consistent provisions of national law, etc. The following ways of solving these problems are proposed: 1) revising the concept and content of the Law of Ukraine "On the implementation of decisions and application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights" and amending the legislation in order to bring it in line with the provisions of the new procedural legislation and modern ideas of theorists and practitioners about the legal nature of decisions The European Court of Human Rights; 2) preparing a resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court on the application of the Convention and the case-law of the Court, which should be based on a thorough analysis of the shortcomings and peculiarities of the case-law of the national courts. The problematic issues of the application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in the absence of official translations of the Court's decisions are examined. Analyzing the views of scholars and experts, we have proposed ways to solve these problems by creating a single electronic database that will contain official translations of Court decisions in the Ukrainian language that will ensure their accessibility and dissemination.

Regional human rights courts like the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), and the African Court of Human and People's Rights (ACtHPR) have become popular sites of mobilization for victims and activists who seek justice when justice fails at home. Besides being platforms for individual remedy, human rights courts increasingly shape social norms and state policy within countries, making them attractive avenues for rights advocates to develop new norms or to push domestic authorities to reform legislation. The judges of these courts can decide, for example, whether same-sex couples have a right to be married, if prisoners have the right to vote or receive HIV/AIDS treatment, or when a state can deport illegal immigrants to a country where they will likely be tortured. As these courts pass their judgments, they often find themselves in conflict with states that are violating human rights of marginalized groups on a large scale and are unwilling to implement international rulings. Although international human rights courts have become increasingly popular venues among victims and activists who seek justice when justice fails at home, we are only beginning to understand how activists play roles in shaping the development of regional human rights courts' case law—the body of judgments that shapes how judges will make their decisions in the future. We now have plenty of international relations and international legal research on the interactions between states and international courts: how judges in these courts wrestle between deferring to the interests of member state governments whose actions are on trial and sticking closely to the conventions' fundamental yet evolving principles (Alter et al., 2019; Helfer & Voeten, 2014). As some states begin to resist international courts' authority, scholars have begun to examine the dynamics of this backlash (Hillebrecht, 2022; Madsen et al., 2018; Sandholtz et al., 2018). Recent studies have also demonstrated that human rights advocates—whether NGOs or individual lawyers—have a significant impact on shaping the jurisprudence of international courts and the impact judgments have in concrete locations (Kahraman, 2018; Sundstrom, 2014; van der Vet, 2012; Kurban, 2020; Conant, 2018; Harms, 2021; Cichowski, 2016; Hodson, 2011; Haddad, 2018). Meanwhile, these advocates themselves have been subject to repression and stigmatization by governments as part of the backlash phenomenon. Without an adequate understanding of the factors shaping activists' engagement with international courts, we risk undervaluing their strategic impact on the expansion of case law, the human rights protection of marginalized groups who cannot find remedies at home, and the domestic implementation of these judgments in an age of state backlash. In this section, we summarize the three papers contained in this symposium and their original contributions to these themes. Over the last decade, dozens of countries have erected legal barriers or started vilifying campaigns to stymie the work of NGOs (Buyse, 2018; Chaudhry, 2022). One tactic in this toolkit is the enactment of burdensome regulation on NGOs that receive funds from foreign donors as they allegedly promote foreign agendas (Christensen & Weinstein, 2013; Dupuy et al., 2021). States that frequently abuse human rights are especially prone to target NGOs that engage in strategic litigation (Hillebrecht, 2019). Most NGOs depend on foreign funding, and NGOs that litigate international cases fall disproportionately in this category, but do funders affect the selection of cases? In “Foreign Agents or Agents of Justice? Private Foundations, NGO Backlash, and International Human Rights Litigation,” Heidi Haddad and Lisa Sundstrom examine the extent to which Western donors, particularly private foundations, have encouraged NGOs in Europe to litigate at the ECtHR as a human rights advocacy strategy. They examine overall patterns of donor funding and NGO litigation records, and look in more detail at the case of Russian NGOs' foreign funding and litigation records. The analysis is extremely timely, as the Russian government's criminalization of independent civil society actors, especially in the human rights field, and their accusation that foreign funding turns NGOs into “foreign agents” have been crucial elements of the Russian regime's autocratization. This claim has also provided fuel for Russia's disenchantment with the ECtHR in recent years, contributing to the assessment of many observers that Russia's full-scale attack on Ukraine was the last straw in an inevitable collision course leading to its exit from the Council of Europe. Haddad and Sundstrom debunk the idea that foreign donors are pushing NGOs toward strategies of human rights litigation. Instead, they argue, there is more evidence that NGOs themselves promoted the mechanism of international litigation as a strategy that donors later adopted. This article is a poignant reminder of the advocacy tools that Russian human rights activists and citizens have lost as a result of their government's departure from the Council of Europe, including ECtHR jurisdiction. Yet it also provides insight into the likely roles of foreign donors in other country cases where NGOs are using international court litigation as a human rights advocacy strategy, which is often a target of the ire of national governments, as explored in the next article in the symposium. When states attack human rights NGOs within their borders and/or international human rights courts themselves, how does this affect the willingness of those NGOs to take cases to international courts, and the ways in which they do so? De Silva and Plagis ask this question in their article about state backlash against NGOs in the case of Tanzania and the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights. A fascinating empirical question they pose is: does state backlash against NGOs increase NGO litigation at international courts (to contest state repression at those courts and use international mechanisms when domestic ones are not available), roughly in line with Keck and Sikkink's famous “boomerang pattern” (Keck & Sikkink, 1998), or decrease it due to heightened fear and restricted NGO capabilities that state repression creates? Employing a process-tracing analysis of NGOs' involvement in three cases before the African Court at different stages of the Tanzanian government's backlash against the Court, De Silva and Plagis find that “two-level backlash” by states can result in both phenomena, either promoting or deterring NGO legal mobilization at international human rights courts, depending on certain conditions. The three selected cases concerning the death penalty, the rights of persons with albinism, and the rights of pregnant schoolgirls and mothers, which took place at different time periods, demonstrate a number of patterns of state backlash interacting with NGO strategies. The authors find that domestic-level state backlash deterred domestic NGOs from partnering with international NGOs in litigation, but that such backlash, when it repressed domestic political and legal mobilization opportunities, actually encouraged both Tanzanian and international NGOs to turn to the African Court more frequently to seek remedies. International-level backlash in turn only deterred NGOs from international litigation when such backlash consisted of state efforts to restrict NGOs' ability to engage in litigation, and not when the international backlash was in the form of routine noncompliance with African Court rulings. Importantly, the authors find that NGO responses to state backlash were significantly shaped by their degree of legal consciousness and expertise with the rules, proceedings, and workings of the African Court. Those NGOs with less knowledge and experience were more likely to back away from engaging with the Court under the pressure of state backlash. De Silva and Plagis conclude that “NGOs' persistent human rights advocacy in the face of state backlash is a double-edged sword,” in the sense that they may not be deterred by state backlash initially, but there is a danger that their continued determination to engage in international litigation could prompt governments to engage in even more severe forms of backlash, with critical impacts on international courts and already vulnerable human rights defenders. Rights advocates have a growing menu of institutions and courts available to them. How do activists choose at which institution to lodge their cases in a world where legal remedies have diversified, or as some have argued, fragmented (Koskenniemi & Leino, 2002)? In “What Makes an International Institution Work for Labor Activists? Shaping International Law through Strategic Litigation,” Filiz Kahraman goes beyond the tendency of legal mobilization studies to only examine how activists interact with a single court or institution. Instead, Kahraman opens up how rights advocates imagine which institution is most receptive to their claims. Drawing on a comparative interview study of British and Turkish trade union activists and their legal mobilization campaigns at international courts and quasi-judicial institutions like the International Labor Organization (ILO), Kahraman examines how activists first probe and then strategically identify which court or international institution is most susceptible to their primary goals of influencing structural reforms and setting new norms. Through this probing process—or dynamic signaling game between courts and litigants—activists push a court's jurisprudence and case law into new issue areas. For instance, at the ECtHR, Turkish trade unionists challenged domestic courts' ruling that public sector workers did not have the right to establish unions, even though the ECtHR had no established case law on labor rights in 1990s. They won the case, with the ECtHR finding that Turkey violated the right of public sector workers to unionize. These cases not only had an impact within Turkey, but over the next decades, similar cases brought by British unionists would spin off the early precedent set by the Turkish legal mobilization efforts. Kahraman argues that they ultimately pushed the ECtHR to recognize the basic trade union rights as fundamental human rights. Kahraman sheds light on the often hidden strategies behind international litigation. Activists litigate not just for the immediate impact on the current case they work on, but how they envision that all the cases they work on may shape norms and domestic structural reforms further in the future. Whether an institution is perceptive of claims lies in the eye of the beholder. Kahraman finds that besides targeting institutions with high compliance rates, they also take cases to institutions with low rates of compliance, especially “if these institutions have extensive judicial authority to create new international norms.” So, it is not the de jure protection set by an international courts, but rather how activists perceive the juridical responsiveness and judicial authority of courts—or, how judges adopt either an activist approach or restraint in response to incoming cases and how willing states are to implement cases of a court, respectively—that determines why activists select certain courts or quasi-judicial institutions (like the ILO). Kahraman gives us new tools to interpret how activists perceive authority and receptiveness and respond to opportunities. Rather than static external legal remedies, courts and quasi-judicial institutions are opportunity structures that are malleable to the strategic vision of the activist or litigant. The articles in this symposium together reveal a number of key overlapping insights. At the broadest level, they demonstrate that activists' behaviors and strategies influence international courts' jurisprudence, politics within states, and the human rights outcomes of everyday citizens—and these influences have often been hidden in our existing canon of research on international courts. In addition, all of these articles show that, while activists may face challenges in their efforts, often including significant backlash from their home state governments, they also continue to retain significant agency through their creative efforts to develop legal strategies and circumvent state repression. Activists perennially innovate: sparking the ideas that inspire donors who fund them; calculating how to continue their litigation work when government actors threaten them; and taking risks in litigation to push courts to expand how they define human rights. However, along with these uplifting conclusions, there are worrying patterns that demand future research. States are increasingly pushing back against the powers of international courts to bind them to costly measures, and as this symposium has shown, national governments often point to activists as contributors to this “problem” of invasive international human rights standards. A growing body of research has tracked how human rights defenders of all kinds globally are under threat from actors like governments and corporations who disagree with their contentious actions. We need more studies that gather comprehensive data and systematically track these threats, specifically with regard to activists who engage in international human rights litigation. We suspect that such activists are likely disproportionately targeted due to the international visibility of their complaints. We also desperately need research into possible innovative responses to these threats to activists—responses from activists, funders, governments of countries that support human rights, and international courts themselves. Freek van der Vet is a University Researcher at the Erik Castrén Institute of International Law and Human Rights, Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki and the principal investigator of the Toxic Crimes Project. Lisa McIntosh Sundstrom is Professor of Political Science at the University of British Columbia. She is the director of the ActinCourts network at UBC and conducts research on legal mobilization by Russian activists.

The study aimed to analyse how the Ukrainian legal system implements the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as to identify problems and prospects for improving this process. The article used methods of legal analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, comparison of national legislation with the European Convention on Human Rights, analysis of the statistics of the European Court of Human Rights, research on the implementation of European Court of Human Rights decisions at the national level, hermeneutics to identify terminological gaps, analysis of the implementation of European standards in the national legal system, and deduction to identify key issues in cases against Ukraine. An analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights revealed numerous systemic human rights violations in Ukraine, particularly in the areas of conditions of detention, unlawful arrests and lengthy court proceedings. Problems with non-enforcement of court decisions and violations of the rights to liberty and dignity have been confirmed by numerous cases, such as Gongadze v. Ukraine and Kharchenko v. Ukraine. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine following the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular the limitation of the term of pre-trial detention, have reduced the number of cases of prolonged detention The study aimed to analyse how the Ukrainian legal system implements the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, as well as to identify problems and prospects for improving this process. The article used methods of legal analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, comparison of national legislation with the European Convention on Human Rights, analysis of the statistics of the European Court of Human Rights, research on the implementation of European Court of Human Rights decisions at the national level, hermeneutics to identify terminological gaps, analysis of the implementation of European standards in the national legal system, and deduction to identify key issues in cases against Ukraine. An analysis of the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights revealed numerous systemic human rights violations in Ukraine, particularly in the areas of conditions of detention, unlawful arrests and lengthy court proceedings. Problems with non-enforcement of court decisions and violations of the rights to liberty and dignity have been confirmed by numerous cases, such as Gongadze v. Ukraine and Kharchenko v. Ukraine. Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine following the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights, in particular the limitation of the term of pre-trial detention, have reduced the number of cases of prolonged detention

Introduction. Ukraine signed Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms many years ago to provide effective protection of fundamental rights for every human that stands out on its' territory. This document is interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights. Practice of this Court must be used by national courts of Ukraine to match international human rights' standards. However, according to results of statistical research, application of that legal positions by national judges aren’t correct enough. The purpose of the paper is to identify and analyze problematic issues of application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights by national courts of Ukraine. The authors also wanted to investigate the national practice of using the ECHR' legal positions and to provide recommendations to address shortcomings in such application. Results. The paper considers the issue of application of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights by the national courts of Ukraine. The legal nature of ECHR decisions' is studied. Authors are stick to the idea that judgments of ECHR aren’t classic precedent. There are authors' opinions about the problem of applying the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, which has no official translation. They think that judges need to be taught professional English and French. So that they will be able to understand original text of judgments correct. There is also a thought about necessity of creating special database with Ukrainian translation of some judgments. Authors have also revealed problematic aspects of the application such as: erroneous, manipulative, formal references. There are some decisions of Ukrainian courts that have been analyzed by the authors. Erroneous references to decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in such cases have been determined. Authors stated that the reason of those defects is insufficient awareness of judges about the specifics of application legal positions of ECHR. Conclusion. According to the results of the work, the importance of education and training of future judges is stated. In addition, authors emphasized on necessity of further observations of this question.

The article analyzes state interference in the exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms under martial law. The peculiarity of such interference is considered through the prism of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights. The need to maintain a balance between public and private interests is indicated. It is emphasized that a balanced ratio is an integral part of the rule of law. Some conclusions from the case of the European Court of Human Rights “Kryvenky v. Ukraine” and the Report of the Venice Commission “On the Rule of Law” are analyzed. It is noted that the general interests of society and a particular individual must be in a fair balance. The opinion was expressed that ensuring the interests of society or the state may also involve restrictions on the exercise of the rights and freedoms of a particular individual. The need for proportionality of such restrictions is emphasized. The rights that cannot be restricted for any reason are indicated. Three main criteria are highlighted according to which a restriction is an unlawful interference with human rights. The criterion of “established by law” is analyzed. It was argued that the concept of “law” in this context should be understood in a broad sense. The requirements for legislation are presented. The “Case of Chahal v. The United Kingdom” and national legislation are analyzed for the presence of the above-mentioned criterion. It is determined that the grounds for the restriction are present, in particular, in the Decree of the President of Ukraine “On the introduction of martial law in Ukraine”. The need to adhere to the principle of the rule of law is emphasized using the example of “Case of Tsezar and others v. Ukraine”. The criterion of “pursuit of a legitimate aim” is analyzed. An exhaustive list of legitimate aims is established, however, it is noted that such aims can be interpreted broadly. The conclusion is made that there is a legitimate aim, namely the need to ensure national security and territorial integrity. The criterion of “necessity in a democratic society” is analyzed. The conclusions in the cases “Case of Dubská and Krejzová v. The Czech Republic”, “Case Of Vavřička And Others v. The Czech Republic” are updated. The possibility of restricting the rights and freedoms of an individual is emphasized only in the absence of alternatives and exclusively to the extent that is minimally sufficient to achieve the set legitimate goal using the example of the ECHR decision “Affaire Vedat Şorli v. Turkey”. It is indicated that in the conditions of martial law in Ukraine, sacrificing less important rights to ensure more important ones is appropriate and necessary in a democratic society. The conclusions are drawn that in the conditions of martial law in Ukraine, restrictions on the exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms are a legitimate interference through the prism of the ECHR. The state should apply restrictions only in extreme cases, and any abuse is not allowed.

The article analyses the process of applying the European Court of Human Rights case law and the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950 in criminal proceedings in Ukraine. The basic principles arising from the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and their impact on national legislation and court practice are investigated. Particular attention is paid to the issues of observance of the right to a fair trial, presumption of innocence, prohibition of torture and effective investigation of human rights violations. The key cases of the European Court of Human Rights against Ukraine, which have determined the directions of reforms in the field of criminal justice, are analysed. The problems of implementation of the European Court of Human Rights case law in the criminal justice system of Ukraine, in particular, the formal approach to the use of case law, the lack of an effective mechanism for the execution of judgments and insufficient training of law enforcement and law enforcement agencies are investigated. The following prospects for improving the application of the European Court of Human Rights case law in criminal proceedings in Ukraine are identified: 1) the amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine to comply with European standards, in particular, with regard to the right to a fair trial, the presumption of innocence, protection against torture and unlawful detention, ill-treatment, etc.; 2) the development of recommendations to improve the training of judges, prosecutors, lawyers and pre-trial investigation bodies; 3) the strengthening of control over the observance of human rights, the reasonableness of the time limits during the pre-trial investigation, and fair and lawful trial; The following prospects for improving the application of the European Court of Human Rights case law in criminal proceedings in Ukraine are identified: 4) the improvement of procedures for verification, evaluation and examination of evidence in order to protect the defence from unlawful actions of the prosecution; 5) the introduction of mechanisms for the effective implementation of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights in individual cases; 6) the provision of adequate funding and resources to law enforcement and law enforcement agencies.

this article is dedicated to the analysis of certain features of the position of the Authorized Person in the Affairs with European Court of Human Rights in the context of the reformation of Ukrainian legislation on public service. It is noted that a necessary condition for the effective organization and execution of public service in Ukraine is the proper differentiation of state positions into political, administrative, judicial, and patronage, as well as a clear distinction of their legal status. It is emphasized that the position of the Authorized Person in the Affairs with European Court of Human Rights in the current legislation of Ukraine is not clearly classified as a state position of a certain type. At the same time, the analysis conducted allows for the assertion that the position of the Authorized Person in the Affairs with European Court of Human Rights simultaneously has features of both political and administrative positions (in particular, positions of the civil service). It is emphasized that such ambiguity can negatively affect the effectiveness of the public service and the development of the institutional system that ensures the representation of Ukraine in the European Court of Human Rights during the consideration of cases concerning violations of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, coordinates the implementation of its decisions, and informs the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe about the progress in implementing the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. In this regard, a conclusion is made about the necessity of clearly classifying the position of the Authorized Person in the Affairs with European Court of Human Rights as a state position of a certain type, which undoubtedly requires developing balanced approaches to regulating the legal status of the Authorized Person in the Affairs with European Court of Human Rights, resolving issues related to the appointment to this position, exercising the powers of the position, and dismissal from the position, etc., which, in turn, necessitates amendments to the laws of Ukraine «On Civil Service» dated 10.12.2015 and «On the Execution of Decisions and Application of the Practice of the European Court of Human Rights» dated 23.02.2006.