Subsidiarity of Human Rights in Practice: The Relationship between the Constitutional Court and Lower Courts in Czechia

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15220%2F19%3A73587981" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15220/19:73587981 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0924051918820987" target="_blank" >https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0924051918820987</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0924051918820987" target="_blank" >10.1177/0924051918820987</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Subsidiarity of Human Rights in Practice: The Relationship between the Constitutional Court and Lower Courts in Czechia

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The principle of subsidiarity is viewed as the cornerstone of the protection of human rights. Internationally, it is primarily the responsibility of states to ensure that human rights are respected and protected on a domestic level and any international protection mechanism is only supplementary. Taken to the domestic level, apex courts in a country also provide only subsidiary protection of human rights, which must first and foremost be protected by lower level courts. Subsidiarity has two facets – the obligation of lower courts directly applying human rights and the corresponding deference of higher courts. Little attention has been given so far to how subsidiarity of human rights works in practice and how human rights are in fact applied by the primary level of court systems. The paper uses Czechia as a case study to test a hypothesis that if lower courts apply human rights then there is a lower chance that the Constitutional Court as an apex court will find a human rights violation in that case. This dependence is indicative that subsidiarity actually works in practice.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Subsidiarity of Human Rights in Practice: The Relationship between the Constitutional Court and Lower Courts in Czechia

Popis výsledku anglicky

The principle of subsidiarity is viewed as the cornerstone of the protection of human rights. Internationally, it is primarily the responsibility of states to ensure that human rights are respected and protected on a domestic level and any international protection mechanism is only supplementary. Taken to the domestic level, apex courts in a country also provide only subsidiary protection of human rights, which must first and foremost be protected by lower level courts. Subsidiarity has two facets – the obligation of lower courts directly applying human rights and the corresponding deference of higher courts. Little attention has been given so far to how subsidiarity of human rights works in practice and how human rights are in fact applied by the primary level of court systems. The paper uses Czechia as a case study to test a hypothesis that if lower courts apply human rights then there is a lower chance that the Constitutional Court as an apex court will find a human rights violation in that case. This dependence is indicative that subsidiarity actually works in practice.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50501 - Law

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA16-07776S" target="_blank" >GA16-07776S: Aplikace lidských práv soudy první a druhé instance</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2019

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights

ISSN

0924-0519

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

31

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

NL - Nizozemsko

Počet stran výsledku

16

Strana od-do

69-84

Kód UT WoS článku

000460637000006

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85070745041