Колективні суб’єкти права: соціальна реальність та/або юридична фікція? / О.З. Панкевич // Науковий вісник Львівського державного університету внутрішніх справ. Серія юридична / Головний редактор Р.І. Благута. – Львів : ЛьвДУВС, 2018. – Вип. 2. – С. 68–77., 2018
The theoretical and philosophical and legal analysis of the ontological status
of collective subj... more The theoretical and philosophical and legal analysis of the ontological status
of collective subjects of law from the point of view of the millennial dispute about
universals is carried out. The main options for resolving this dispute, such as nominalism,
realism and conceptualism, are outlined. It is emphasized that a certain
position on the problem of universals determines for each researcher (consciously
or unknowingly, explicitly or implicitly) different outgoing ideological and methodological
guidelines, in particular in the field of law and, in fact, the theory and philosophy
of human rights.
It is noted that it is exactly from the point of view of the dispute about the
universals analysis of the socio-legal nature and the ontological status of collective
subjects of law that there is a large, hitherto undiscovered in Ukrainian scientific
literature, heuristic potential.
This concerns, in particular, the possibility of using the results of such an
analysis in the study of approaches to understanding such fundamental categories
as «national sovereignty», «general will», «public interest», etc., used in the consideration
of national and international judicial bodies of specific legal cases on the
protection of constitutional rights of a person. This, in turn, involves mandatory
«balancing», «weighing» the rights of an individual, on the one hand, and public
interests, on the other hand.
It is indicated that taking into account the peculiarities of the social and legal
nature of collective subjects of law one of the most important is the problem of
representation of collective interests, ontological and legal status of the representative
body as a «speaker» of the thoughts and aspirations of the collective. Obviously,
from the point of view of constitutional law, this opportunity should be considered in
the light issues of representative democracy in general.
Key words: universals, realism, nominalism, conceptualism, individual subjects
of law, collective subjects of law, representation of collective interests.
Здійснено загальнотеоретичний та філософсько-правовий аналіз онтологічного статусу колективних субʼєктів права з погляду спору про універсалії. Окреслено основні варіанти вирішення цього спору. Закцентовано на питанні представництва колективних інтересів. Наголошено, що певна позиція щодо проблеми універсалій визначає для кожного дослідника (експліцитно чи імпліцитно) відмінні вихідні світоглядно-методологічні настанови, зокрема у сфері правознавства і, власне, теорії й філософії прав людини. Ключові слова: універсалії, реалізм, номіналізм, концептуалізм, індивідуальні субʼєкти права, колективні субʼєкти права, представництво колективних інтересів.
Uploads
Papers by Oleg Pankevych
This article offers a comprehensive analysis of the phenomenon of euthanasia, focusing primarily on the international experience of its regulation. The article examines various aspects of euthanasia, in particular in the context of the Russian-Ukrainian war, identifying the main conditions under which such an ambiguous and controversial type of medical care is possible.
The author analyses the diverse positions and justifications of domestic and foreign scholars regarding the possibility of implementing euthanasia. It is found that the problem of this type of voluntary death is multifaceted and requires a comprehensive approach, and its solution should take into account not only medical but also ethical, religious, legal and social aspects.
Particular attention is paid to the analysis of case law and legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights and international instruments relating to the protection of the right to life and human dignity. It is noted that the legal regulation of issues related to the right to a «merciful death» is diverse and depends on the national legislation of the States parties to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
cases relating to the prohibition of discrimination. The conclusion is about the evaluative nature
of the Court’s assessment when using nondiscrimination algorythm and relatively subordinate
role played by rational elements in judicial estimation. Key components of the nondiscrimination
algorythm (tests for comparability, justification and proportionality) require the use of the
Court’s assessment of value. Therefore, there is a reason to consider judicial nondiscrimination
algorythm not only as an instrument of logical analysis of the case, but as a way to organize and
perform the results of assessment of value. In such a situation, practically the only criterion for
the rationality of such assessment are the procedural acts: a decision by a majority of members
of the panel.
constitutional justice in Ukraine. As a result of constitutional changes, the scientific discussion on the legal nature and place of the Constitutional Court in the mechanism of the state has become especially relevant.
The Constitutional Court is a legal institution, but it operates in both the system of legal and the system of
political relations. Many of the decisions adopted by him on the basis of the Constitution have political and legal
content and significance.
If the Constitutional Court declares acts or their individual provisions unconstitutional, they shall cease to
be valid. Therefore, the bodies of constitutional control are called «negative lawmakers». However, in some
cases they are also «positive legislators», which also characterizes the legal nature of the Constitutional Court,
as its legal positions are characterized by normative-interpretative, generalizing nature and universality.
The article is devoted to the study of the legal nature and place of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine
in the modern mechanism of the state. In essence, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is the highest
constitutional body and occupies a special place in the system of separation of powers. By changing the
status of the Constitutional Court as the only body of constitutional jurisdiction, the 2016 constitutional reform
significantly changed its nature: it became an independent body of constitutional control, equidistant from
the legislative, executive, judicial bodies and president. On certain grounds, the Constitutional Court is
above these bodies, because through the exercise of constitutional control, this body can influence their
activities by resolving cases on the constitutionality of acts issued by them and the official interpretation of
the Constitution of Ukraine.
Key concepts: Constitutional Court of Ukraine; constitutional justice; constitutional control; separation of
powers; constitutional reform.
AND METHODOLOGICAL FOUNDATION OF THE FORMATION
AND DEVELOPMENT OF LAW DOCTRINE
(BASED ON THE MATERIALS OF THE 2021–2023
JOURNAL DISCUSSION)
ABSTRACT. In Ukrainian jurisprudence, the issue of the formation and development
of law doctrine has been brought up recently, an issue that constantly remains in the field
of attention of the world legal community.
The purpose of the proposed article is to provide the author’s interpretation of
the general concept of law doctrine and demonstrate the role of law understanding as
a conceptual and methodological foundation for the formation and development of the
latter.
In view of the multiplicity of legal phenomena “lawfulness” and “legality” can hardly
be considered as their single-meaning characteristics. The property of “legality” can be
associated only with those social phenomena that are the result of the state’s manifestation of will, the power-regulatory activity of state bodies. From such positions, only such doctrine, which is directly pronounced, supported, and used by governmental bodies
in their legal and regulatory practice, will be considered legal. The basis of the given
interpretation of legal doctrine is the understanding of law as established or sanctioned
by the state, while among other types of law understandings, in particular, “natural” or
sociological, state-regulatory activity is most often not mentioned at all.
It seems reasonable to consider a law doctrine as a complete, logically agreed, dynamic
system of worldview-conceptual views of a general, instructive-directive nature regarding
such human life activity, the concept of which is denoted by the term “lawful”. Given the
well-known historical pluralism of law understanding, the pluralism of law doctrines is
and, obviously, will be insurmountable in the future.
The conceptual distinction between law and legal doctrines in itself does not disprove
the fact that both of the just mentioned types of doctrines can have their own socionecessary
and conceptual sources of plurality, one way or another. Instead, the conceptual
basis for a monistic, unified interpretation of the concept of legal doctrine today, as before,
is only a state-centric approach to the understanding of law.
KEYWORDS: doctrine, law understanding, law doctrine, legal doctrine; lawfulness;
legality.
IN THE PRACTICE OF THE STRASBOURG COURT:
SOME GENERAL THEORETICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL
AND LEGAL ASPECTS
ABSTRACT. One of the vital problems of our time is the global environmental crisis,
which naturally brought to the fore in world jurisprudence the issue of formation and
development of the concept of ensuring and protecting the human right to an environment
safe for life and health.
The purpose of the proposed article is a general theoretical and philosophical-legal
analysis of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the protection
of environmental human rights.
Thanks to the decisions of the Court in “ecological” cases, the provisions of Articles 2,
3, 6, 8, 10, 13, 14 and Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 was filled with a number of new meanings,
which proves the “living” nature of the Convention on the Protection of Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms. Today, this trend continues to develop in, so to speak, geometric
progression, covering more and more aspects of the protection of fundamental human
rights.
At the same time, from the point of view of determining the philosophical and legal
basis of the views of the ECtHR judges, it is important to emphasize the implementation
of the well-known universal formula (and “ecological” cases are no exception) regarding
the search for “a fair balance between the competing interests of an individual and
society”. The direct recognition in the principle of “fair balance” of the importance of
the community’s interests gives grounds not only to assert the consonance of the Court’s
approaches with the postulates of liberal communitarianism, but also to assume their
peculiar embodiment in legal practice.
It should also be borne in mind that in the modern world, environmental problems are
global, their consequences are widespread and ultimately affect the interests of the entire
society, all of humanity (including future generations).
This can be particularly vividly illustrated by the example of the so-called “climate”
cases, the first of which, as noted, are already under consideration by the Strasbourg
Court. We think that consideration of these cases can become a turning point, a kind of
“bifurcation point”, after the successful passage of which the concept of environmental
rights in the practice of the Court has a chance to move to a new, unprecedented level of
development.
KEYWORDS: environmental rights; environmental protection; Convention on the
Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; European Court of Human Rights;
“climatic” affairs; liberalism; communitarianism; liberal communitarianism.
Human Rights practice with regard to the protection of the right to privacy (the right to respect for private and
family life). A particular attention is paid to the need to consider the differences between communitarian, liberalistic
and potestary interpretations of the legal categories. A high profile is given to coverage of features of Article 8
of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, where, according to the
author, the tension on the line of liberalism is most evident – communitarianism: since the right to privacy itself
is most liberalistic, i.e. the one that is the core of this political and legal philosophy. Thanks to the decision of the
Court, a number of new senses has joined the provision of Article 8, which is an evidence of a "living" nature
of the Convention. Today, the trend continues to be observed, covering even more aspects of private life of a
person. The recognition by the Strasbourg Court of the positive obligations of the state on implementing the rights
guaranteed by Article 8 of the European Convention in addition to its obligation of non-interference in the private
sphere of citizens, can be considered not only as evidence of some evolution of legal stance of the European
Court of Human Rights, but as philosophical and legal approaches that formed their basis. Philosophical and legal
foundation of the Court’s stance regarding private life is transformed from classical liberal (and even libertarian)
principles – to implicit neoliberal premises, which manifests itself in including in the content of the considered
conventional law of obligations of the state on taking active steps to ensure its reality and effectiveness.
Key words: right to privacy, the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,
the European Court of Human Rights, liberalism, communitarianism, liberal communitarianism, potestary
discourse.
of collective subjects of law from the point of view of the millennial dispute about
universals is carried out. The main options for resolving this dispute, such as nominalism,
realism and conceptualism, are outlined. It is emphasized that a certain
position on the problem of universals determines for each researcher (consciously
or unknowingly, explicitly or implicitly) different outgoing ideological and methodological
guidelines, in particular in the field of law and, in fact, the theory and philosophy
of human rights.
It is noted that it is exactly from the point of view of the dispute about the
universals analysis of the socio-legal nature and the ontological status of collective
subjects of law that there is a large, hitherto undiscovered in Ukrainian scientific
literature, heuristic potential.
This concerns, in particular, the possibility of using the results of such an
analysis in the study of approaches to understanding such fundamental categories
as «national sovereignty», «general will», «public interest», etc., used in the consideration
of national and international judicial bodies of specific legal cases on the
protection of constitutional rights of a person. This, in turn, involves mandatory
«balancing», «weighing» the rights of an individual, on the one hand, and public
interests, on the other hand.
It is indicated that taking into account the peculiarities of the social and legal
nature of collective subjects of law one of the most important is the problem of
representation of collective interests, ontological and legal status of the representative
body as a «speaker» of the thoughts and aspirations of the collective. Obviously,
from the point of view of constitutional law, this opportunity should be considered in
the light issues of representative democracy in general.
Key words: universals, realism, nominalism, conceptualism, individual subjects
of law, collective subjects of law, representation of collective interests.
Здійснено загальнотеоретичний та філософсько-правовий аналіз онтологічного статусу колективних субʼєктів права з погляду спору про універсалії. Окреслено основні варіанти вирішення цього спору. Закцентовано на питанні представництва колективних інтересів. Наголошено, що певна позиція щодо проблеми універсалій визначає для кожного дослідника (експліцитно чи імпліцитно) відмінні вихідні світоглядно-методологічні настанови, зокрема у сфері правознавства і, власне, теорії й філософії прав людини. Ключові слова: універсалії, реалізм, номіналізм, концептуалізм, індивідуальні субʼєкти права, колективні субʼєкти права, представництво колективних інтересів.
Attention is drawn to the fact privacy in the Ukrainian state as a political and legal phenomenon remains largely terra incognita. The case is not only that the term "privacy" is a "shortcut" for a special legal category in the English and American legal systems and has no analogues in the Ukrainian language. It may mean private life in some cases, the right to privacy — in the second cases, and the right to protection of private life — in the third, etc.
Another important reason for the above situation is that privacy issues were ignored during the Soviet period: since a human was considered only a "screw" in the state mechanism of the totalitarian political machine. Thus, of course, no attention was paid to the problems of the individual either in theory or in practice; it was thought at that time that the latter simply does not deserve such attention! The theory was developing by giving absolute priority to such concepts as "working people", "Soviet people" that led to "neglecting" individuals" ignoring their needs and interests. This situation is unacceptable in today's civilized world.
It is particularly emphasized that right to privacy, "core" issue of which is related to gaining, keeping and disseminating information about a person, is exposed to constant threats of abuse in the rapid development of the latest technology.
This article attempts to make a general theoretical and philosophical and legal analysis of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights on protection of human right for non-discrimination.
Particular attention is paid to the need of considering differences between communitarian and liberalistic interpretations of legal categories, including category of discrimination.
Significant attention is paid to the coverage of features of the Article 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (which make it somewhat unique in the system of the Convention mechanism to protect human rights and freedoms) and Protocol No. 12 thereto.
The publication notes that the requirement of non-discrimination (prohibition of discrimination) is the one of the components of general legal principles of equality, which, however, is not limited by the definite requirement itself, as the need for differentiation of legal regulation is also considered as something that contributes to providing the actual ("full and true") equality.
Thus, the principle of prohibition of discrimination may be regarded as a formaland legal implementation of the principle of equality that is much wider in scope as one of system fundamentals of the constitutional and legal status of human and citizen in the modern states of Europe.
It is noted that in numerous precedents of the European Court of Human Rights (particularly in cases: "Relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium" (23.07.1968), "Thlimmenos v. Greece") 06.04.2000)) the concept of discrimination gained a clear "dual" interpretation as a) different treatment without any objective and reasonable justification for the persons who are in relatively similar situations, and b) equal treatment for the persons that are in completely different situations.
Key words: prohibition of discrimination, the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the European Court of Human Rights, liberalism, communitarianism, liberal communitarianism
This article offers a comprehensive analysis of the phenomenon of euthanasia, focusing primarily on the international experience of its regulation. The article examines various aspects of euthanasia, in particular in the context of the Russian-Ukrainian war, identifying the main conditions under which such an ambiguous and controversial type of medical care is possible.
The author analyses the diverse positions and justifications of domestic and foreign scholars regarding the possibility of implementing euthanasia. It is found that the problem of this type of voluntary death is multifaceted and requires a comprehensive approach, and its solution should take into account not only medical but also ethical, religious, legal and social aspects.
Particular attention is paid to the analysis of case law and legal positions of the European Court of Human Rights and international instruments relating to the protection of the right to life and human dignity. It is noted that the legal regulation of issues related to the right to a «merciful death» is diverse and depends on the national legislation of the States parties to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
cases relating to the prohibition of discrimination. The conclusion is about the evaluative nature
of the Court’s assessment when using nondiscrimination algorythm and relatively subordinate
role played by rational elements in judicial estimation. Key components of the nondiscrimination
algorythm (tests for comparability, justification and proportionality) require the use of the
Court’s assessment of value. Therefore, there is a reason to consider judicial nondiscrimination
algorythm not only as an instrument of logical analysis of the case, but as a way to organize and
perform the results of assessment of value. In such a situation, practically the only criterion for
the rationality of such assessment are the procedural acts: a decision by a majority of members
of the panel.
constitutional justice in Ukraine. As a result of constitutional changes, the scientific discussion on the legal nature and place of the Constitutional Court in the mechanism of the state has become especially relevant.
The Constitutional Court is a legal institution, but it operates in both the system of legal and the system of
political relations. Many of the decisions adopted by him on the basis of the Constitution have political and legal
content and significance.
If the Constitutional Court declares acts or their individual provisions unconstitutional, they shall cease to
be valid. Therefore, the bodies of constitutional control are called «negative lawmakers». However, in some
cases they are also «positive legislators», which also characterizes the legal nature of the Constitutional Court,
as its legal positions are characterized by normative-interpretative, generalizing nature and universality.
The article is devoted to the study of the legal nature and place of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine
in the modern mechanism of the state. In essence, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is the highest
constitutional body and occupies a special place in the system of separation of powers. By changing the
status of the Constitutional Court as the only body of constitutional jurisdiction, the 2016 constitutional reform
significantly changed its nature: it became an independent body of constitutional control, equidistant from
the legislative, executive, judicial bodies and president. On certain grounds, the Constitutional Court is
above these bodies, because through the exercise of constitutional control, this body can influence their
activities by resolving cases on the constitutionality of acts issued by them and the official interpretation of
the Constitution of Ukraine.
Key concepts: Constitutional Court of Ukraine; constitutional justice; constitutional control; separation of
powers; constitutional reform.
AND METHODOLOGICAL FOUNDATION OF THE FORMATION
AND DEVELOPMENT OF LAW DOCTRINE
(BASED ON THE MATERIALS OF THE 2021–2023
JOURNAL DISCUSSION)
ABSTRACT. In Ukrainian jurisprudence, the issue of the formation and development
of law doctrine has been brought up recently, an issue that constantly remains in the field
of attention of the world legal community.
The purpose of the proposed article is to provide the author’s interpretation of
the general concept of law doctrine and demonstrate the role of law understanding as
a conceptual and methodological foundation for the formation and development of the
latter.
In view of the multiplicity of legal phenomena “lawfulness” and “legality” can hardly
be considered as their single-meaning characteristics. The property of “legality” can be
associated only with those social phenomena that are the result of the state’s manifestation of will, the power-regulatory activity of state bodies. From such positions, only such doctrine, which is directly pronounced, supported, and used by governmental bodies
in their legal and regulatory practice, will be considered legal. The basis of the given
interpretation of legal doctrine is the understanding of law as established or sanctioned
by the state, while among other types of law understandings, in particular, “natural” or
sociological, state-regulatory activity is most often not mentioned at all.
It seems reasonable to consider a law doctrine as a complete, logically agreed, dynamic
system of worldview-conceptual views of a general, instructive-directive nature regarding
such human life activity, the concept of which is denoted by the term “lawful”. Given the
well-known historical pluralism of law understanding, the pluralism of law doctrines is
and, obviously, will be insurmountable in the future.
The conceptual distinction between law and legal doctrines in itself does not disprove
the fact that both of the just mentioned types of doctrines can have their own socionecessary
and conceptual sources of plurality, one way or another. Instead, the conceptual
basis for a monistic, unified interpretation of the concept of legal doctrine today, as before,
is only a state-centric approach to the understanding of law.
KEYWORDS: doctrine, law understanding, law doctrine, legal doctrine; lawfulness;
legality.
IN THE PRACTICE OF THE STRASBOURG COURT:
SOME GENERAL THEORETICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL
AND LEGAL ASPECTS
ABSTRACT. One of the vital problems of our time is the global environmental crisis,
which naturally brought to the fore in world jurisprudence the issue of formation and
development of the concept of ensuring and protecting the human right to an environment
safe for life and health.
The purpose of the proposed article is a general theoretical and philosophical-legal
analysis of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights regarding the protection
of environmental human rights.
Thanks to the decisions of the Court in “ecological” cases, the provisions of Articles 2,
3, 6, 8, 10, 13, 14 and Art. 1 of Protocol No. 1 was filled with a number of new meanings,
which proves the “living” nature of the Convention on the Protection of Rights and
Fundamental Freedoms. Today, this trend continues to develop in, so to speak, geometric
progression, covering more and more aspects of the protection of fundamental human
rights.
At the same time, from the point of view of determining the philosophical and legal
basis of the views of the ECtHR judges, it is important to emphasize the implementation
of the well-known universal formula (and “ecological” cases are no exception) regarding
the search for “a fair balance between the competing interests of an individual and
society”. The direct recognition in the principle of “fair balance” of the importance of
the community’s interests gives grounds not only to assert the consonance of the Court’s
approaches with the postulates of liberal communitarianism, but also to assume their
peculiar embodiment in legal practice.
It should also be borne in mind that in the modern world, environmental problems are
global, their consequences are widespread and ultimately affect the interests of the entire
society, all of humanity (including future generations).
This can be particularly vividly illustrated by the example of the so-called “climate”
cases, the first of which, as noted, are already under consideration by the Strasbourg
Court. We think that consideration of these cases can become a turning point, a kind of
“bifurcation point”, after the successful passage of which the concept of environmental
rights in the practice of the Court has a chance to move to a new, unprecedented level of
development.
KEYWORDS: environmental rights; environmental protection; Convention on the
Protection of Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; European Court of Human Rights;
“climatic” affairs; liberalism; communitarianism; liberal communitarianism.
Human Rights practice with regard to the protection of the right to privacy (the right to respect for private and
family life). A particular attention is paid to the need to consider the differences between communitarian, liberalistic
and potestary interpretations of the legal categories. A high profile is given to coverage of features of Article 8
of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, where, according to the
author, the tension on the line of liberalism is most evident – communitarianism: since the right to privacy itself
is most liberalistic, i.e. the one that is the core of this political and legal philosophy. Thanks to the decision of the
Court, a number of new senses has joined the provision of Article 8, which is an evidence of a "living" nature
of the Convention. Today, the trend continues to be observed, covering even more aspects of private life of a
person. The recognition by the Strasbourg Court of the positive obligations of the state on implementing the rights
guaranteed by Article 8 of the European Convention in addition to its obligation of non-interference in the private
sphere of citizens, can be considered not only as evidence of some evolution of legal stance of the European
Court of Human Rights, but as philosophical and legal approaches that formed their basis. Philosophical and legal
foundation of the Court’s stance regarding private life is transformed from classical liberal (and even libertarian)
principles – to implicit neoliberal premises, which manifests itself in including in the content of the considered
conventional law of obligations of the state on taking active steps to ensure its reality and effectiveness.
Key words: right to privacy, the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,
the European Court of Human Rights, liberalism, communitarianism, liberal communitarianism, potestary
discourse.
of collective subjects of law from the point of view of the millennial dispute about
universals is carried out. The main options for resolving this dispute, such as nominalism,
realism and conceptualism, are outlined. It is emphasized that a certain
position on the problem of universals determines for each researcher (consciously
or unknowingly, explicitly or implicitly) different outgoing ideological and methodological
guidelines, in particular in the field of law and, in fact, the theory and philosophy
of human rights.
It is noted that it is exactly from the point of view of the dispute about the
universals analysis of the socio-legal nature and the ontological status of collective
subjects of law that there is a large, hitherto undiscovered in Ukrainian scientific
literature, heuristic potential.
This concerns, in particular, the possibility of using the results of such an
analysis in the study of approaches to understanding such fundamental categories
as «national sovereignty», «general will», «public interest», etc., used in the consideration
of national and international judicial bodies of specific legal cases on the
protection of constitutional rights of a person. This, in turn, involves mandatory
«balancing», «weighing» the rights of an individual, on the one hand, and public
interests, on the other hand.
It is indicated that taking into account the peculiarities of the social and legal
nature of collective subjects of law one of the most important is the problem of
representation of collective interests, ontological and legal status of the representative
body as a «speaker» of the thoughts and aspirations of the collective. Obviously,
from the point of view of constitutional law, this opportunity should be considered in
the light issues of representative democracy in general.
Key words: universals, realism, nominalism, conceptualism, individual subjects
of law, collective subjects of law, representation of collective interests.
Здійснено загальнотеоретичний та філософсько-правовий аналіз онтологічного статусу колективних субʼєктів права з погляду спору про універсалії. Окреслено основні варіанти вирішення цього спору. Закцентовано на питанні представництва колективних інтересів. Наголошено, що певна позиція щодо проблеми універсалій визначає для кожного дослідника (експліцитно чи імпліцитно) відмінні вихідні світоглядно-методологічні настанови, зокрема у сфері правознавства і, власне, теорії й філософії прав людини. Ключові слова: універсалії, реалізм, номіналізм, концептуалізм, індивідуальні субʼєкти права, колективні субʼєкти права, представництво колективних інтересів.
Attention is drawn to the fact privacy in the Ukrainian state as a political and legal phenomenon remains largely terra incognita. The case is not only that the term "privacy" is a "shortcut" for a special legal category in the English and American legal systems and has no analogues in the Ukrainian language. It may mean private life in some cases, the right to privacy — in the second cases, and the right to protection of private life — in the third, etc.
Another important reason for the above situation is that privacy issues were ignored during the Soviet period: since a human was considered only a "screw" in the state mechanism of the totalitarian political machine. Thus, of course, no attention was paid to the problems of the individual either in theory or in practice; it was thought at that time that the latter simply does not deserve such attention! The theory was developing by giving absolute priority to such concepts as "working people", "Soviet people" that led to "neglecting" individuals" ignoring their needs and interests. This situation is unacceptable in today's civilized world.
It is particularly emphasized that right to privacy, "core" issue of which is related to gaining, keeping and disseminating information about a person, is exposed to constant threats of abuse in the rapid development of the latest technology.
This article attempts to make a general theoretical and philosophical and legal analysis of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights on protection of human right for non-discrimination.
Particular attention is paid to the need of considering differences between communitarian and liberalistic interpretations of legal categories, including category of discrimination.
Significant attention is paid to the coverage of features of the Article 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (which make it somewhat unique in the system of the Convention mechanism to protect human rights and freedoms) and Protocol No. 12 thereto.
The publication notes that the requirement of non-discrimination (prohibition of discrimination) is the one of the components of general legal principles of equality, which, however, is not limited by the definite requirement itself, as the need for differentiation of legal regulation is also considered as something that contributes to providing the actual ("full and true") equality.
Thus, the principle of prohibition of discrimination may be regarded as a formaland legal implementation of the principle of equality that is much wider in scope as one of system fundamentals of the constitutional and legal status of human and citizen in the modern states of Europe.
It is noted that in numerous precedents of the European Court of Human Rights (particularly in cases: "Relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium" (23.07.1968), "Thlimmenos v. Greece") 06.04.2000)) the concept of discrimination gained a clear "dual" interpretation as a) different treatment without any objective and reasonable justification for the persons who are in relatively similar situations, and b) equal treatment for the persons that are in completely different situations.
Key words: prohibition of discrimination, the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the European Court of Human Rights, liberalism, communitarianism, liberal communitarianism
праць Львівської лабораторії прав людини Академії правових наук України (нині ‒ Львівської лабораторії прав людини і громадянина Науково-дослідного інституту державного будівництва та місцевого самоврядування Національної академії правових наук України).
Для науковців, викладачів, здобувачів вищої освіти юридичних та інших гуманітарних навчальних закладів, юристів-практиків та й,
зрештою, для усіх, хто не байдужий до означеної проблематики.
Розглядаються питання, що стосуються історії проектування міжнародно-правових актів з праволюдинної проблематики (насамперед Загальної декларації), їхніх філософсько-правових і загальнотеоретичних аспектів, особливостей функціонування, а також можливостей посилення правозахисного впливу.
До видання вперше включено книжкову версію українських перекладів унікальних документальних матеріалів – доктринальних попередників Загальної декларації прав людини.
Книга розрахована на науковців, викладачів, аспірантів та студентів гуманітарного (передовсім, юридичного) профілю, а також на кожного, хто цікавиться людськими правами – притому, не тільки своїми, а й інших людей.
Monograph is dedicated to the 70th anniversary of the epoch-making document – the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The book regards the historical issues of the preparation and drafting of the international human rights acts, of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the first place. It covers in particular the philosophical and theoretical aspects of their functioning and also the ways of intensification of their law-enforcement impact.
Some translated acts (the doctrinal predecessors of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) are enclosed in the form of monograph for the first time in Ukraine.
The book is addressed to scholars, university professors, postgraduates and students of the human sciences (of the legal disciplines in the first place) and to everyone who is interested in human rights (not only of his own rights, but also of the rights of all other people).
лабораторії прав людини Академії правових наук України (нині ‒ Львівської лабораторії прав людини і громадянина Науково-дослідного інституту державного будівництва та місцевого самоврядування Національної академії правових наук України).
Висвітлено результати досліджень низки актуальних питань проблематики
верховенства права – як загальнотеоретичних (насамперед, сучасних інтерпретацій
означеного феномена та поняття про нього), так і юридико-практичних.