نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی - پژوهشی
نویسنده
عضو هیأت علمی دانشگاه مفید
چکیده
مقاله حاضر در‌صدد تحلیل دکترین حاشیه تفسیر و توسعة صلاحیت دولت‌ها در تحدید حق بر آزادی ابراز دین به منظور حفظ امنیت، نظم، بهداشت، اخلاق عمومی یا حقوق اساسی و آزادی‌های دیگران است؛ و به این سؤال پاسخ می‌گوید که دکترین اروپایی «حاشیه‌تفسیر» در تحدید آزادی دینی، با توجه به وضعیت مسلمانان در اروپا چگونه ارزیابی می‌شود؟ و این فرضیه را اثبات می‌کند که ایده مزبور در توجه به تأثیر شرایط متغیر و تنوع ادیان و فرهنگ‌ها در تحدید اجرای‌حق بر آزادی دینی مفید ولی ناکافی است و راهکارهایی را پیشنهاد می‌نماید.
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
The doctrine of the `margin of appreciation` and the limitation of the right to religious manifestation: with special emphasis on Muslims in Europe
نویسنده [English]
- saeid Rahayi
Mofid University faculty member
چکیده [English]
This article aims at investigating the doctrine of the margin of appreciation and the expansion of the jurisdiction of the states in limiting the right to freedom to manifest one's religion in order to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. It also seeks to find the answer to the question of how, in limiting religious freedom, the European doctrine of the margin of appreciation can be evaluated regarding the status of Muslims in Europe. Furthermore, it purports to confirm the hypothesis that this doctrine is helpful but not sufficient in limiting the implementation of the right to freedom of religion considering the impact of changing conditions and the diversity of religions and cultures. Finally, it offers some solutions
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- human rights
- margin of appreciation
- freedom of religion
- limiting the rights
- European court of human rights
منابع
الف- فارسی
1- برمز، اوا؛ سازش میان جهان‌شمولی و تنوع در نظام بین‌المللی حقوق بشر: چارچوبی نظری و روش‌شناختی، ترجمه محمد حبیبی مجنده، در مجموعه مقالات همایش بین‌المللی «مبانی نظری حقوق بشر»، قم، دانشگاه مفید،1384.
2- بلدسو، رابرت و بوسچک بولسلاو؛ فرهنگ حقوق بین‌الملل، ترجمه علیرضا پارسا، تهران، نشر قومس، 1375.
3- جعفری لنگرودی، محمد جعفر؛ ترمینولوژی حقوق، تهران، گنج دانش، 1367.
4- رنجبریان، امیر حسین؛ جایگاه قاعده منع شکنجه در حقوق بین‌الملل معاصر، فصلنامه دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی دانشگاه‌تهران، زمستان 1384، شماره 70.
5- سادات‌اخوی، سیدعلی و حسینی‌اکبرنژاد، حوریه؛ اِعمال فرا سرزمینی کنوانسیون اروپایی حقوق بشر در رویة قضایی دیوان اروپاییحقوق بشر، فصلنامه حقوق، مجله دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، زمستان 1388، دوره 39، شماره 4.
6- ضیائی بیگدلی، محمدرضا؛ حقوق بین‌الملل عمومی، بی‌جا، چاپ پنجم، 1369.
7- فلسفی، هدایت‌الله؛ حقوق بین‌الملل معاهدات، تهران، نشر نو، 1379.
8- قربان‌نیا، ناصر؛ حقوق بشر و حقوق بشردوستانه، تهران، پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و اندیشه اسلامی، 1387.
ب- لاتین
9- Arai-Takahashi, Yutaka, The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of Proportionality in the Jurisprudence of the ECHR, New York, Intersentia, 2001.
10- Baehr, Peter R. and Castermans-Holleman, Monique (eds) ,The Role of Human Rights in Foreign Policy, 3rd. ed. New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
11- Benvenisti, Eyal, Margin of Appreciation, Consensus and Universal Standards, New York Journal of International law and Politics, Vol. 31, 1999, No. 4.
12- Brems, Eva, Reconciling Universality and Diversity in International Human Rights: A Theoretical methodological Framework, in Carl Wellman & M. Habibi Modjandeh (eds), Theoretical Foundations of Human Rights, Qom, Mofid University, 2007.
13- __________ , The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights, Heidelberg Journal of International Law, Vol. 56, 1996.
14- Carozza, Paolo G., Subsidiarity as a Structural Principle of International Human Rights Law, American Journal of International Law, Jan, Vol. 97, 2003, No. 1.
15- Del Moral, Ignacio de la Rasilla, The Increasingly Marginal Appreciation of the Margin of Appreciation Doctrine, German Law Journal, Vol. 7, 2006, Issue No. 6.
16- Dixon, Martin and Maccorquodale, Robert, Cases & Materials on International Law, London, Blackstone Press, 2nd. ed., 1995.
17- Evans, Carolyn, Freedom of Religion under the European Convention on Human Rights, New York, OxfordUniversity Press, 2001.
18- __________ , The Islamic Scarf in the European Court of Human Rights, Melbourne Journal of International Law, Vol. 7, May 2006, Issue 1.
19- Greer, Steven, The European Convention on Human Rights; Achievements, Problems and Prospects, New York, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2006.
20- Gross, Oren and N´I Aol´ain, Fionnuala, Law in Times of Crisis Emergency powers in theory and practice, New York, Cambridge University Press, 2006.
21- Halliday, Simon, and Schmidt, Patrick (eds), Human Rights Brought Home: Socio-Legal Perspectives on Human Rights in the National Context, Hart Publishing, Oregon, 2004.
22- Handeyside, Hugh, The Lotus Principle in ICJ Jurisprudence: Was the Ship ever Afloat?, Michigan Journal of International Law, Vol. 29, 2008, No. 1.
23- Hutchinson, Michael R., The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in the European Court of Human Rights, International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 48, Jul 1999, No. 3.
24- IHRC Iceland Human Rights Centre, Interpretation of Human Rights Treaties. available at http://www.humanrights.is/the-human-rights-project
25- JowellQC, Jeffery and Cooper, Jonathan, Understanding Human Rights Principles, Oregon, Hart Publishing, 2002.
26- Martin, Francisco Forrest and Others, International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law: Treaties, Cases and Analysis, New York, CambridgeUniversity Press, 2006.
27- Mensah, Barbara, European human rights case summaries 1960-2000, London, Cavendish Publishing, 2002.
28- Shany,Yuval, Toward a general Margin of Appreciation Doctrine in International Law?, European Journal of International Law, Vol. 16, 2005, No. 5.
29- Smith, Adam M, Good Fences Make Good Neighbors?: The “Wall Decision” and the Troubling Rise of the ICJ as a Human Rights Court, Harvard Human Rights Journal, Vol. 18, 2005.
30- Tulkens, Françoise The European Convention on Human Rights and Church- State Relations: Pluralism v. Pluralism, Cardozo Law Review, Vol. 30, 2009, 6.
31- Weeramantry, C. G, Universalising International Law, Leiden, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2004.
ج- آراء
32- Abdulaziz, Cabales and Balkandali v. United Kingdoom, Application Nos. 9214/80; 9473/81; 9474/81, 28 May 1985.
33- Cha’are Shalom Ve Tsedek v. France [GC], Application No. 27417/95, ECHR 2000-VII.
34- Hasan and Chaush v. Bulgaria [GC], Application No. 30985/96, ECHR 2000-XI.
35- Hertzberg et al. v. Finland, U.N. GAOR HRC, 37th Sess., Supp. No. 40, U.N. Doc. A/37/40 (1982).
36- Holy Synod of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church (Metropolitan Inokentiy) and Others v. Bulgaria, Applications Nos. 412/03 and 35677/04, (22 January 2009).
37- Kokkinakis v. Greece, Application No. 14307/88 (Ser. A) No. 260–A ECtHR (1993).
38- Lansman et al. v. Finland, U.N. GAOR HRC., 58th Sess., No. 671/1995, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/58/D/671/1995 (1996).
39- Murphy v. Ireland, Application No. 44179/98, (2003) 38 EHRR.
40- Stec and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], Applications Nos. 65731/01 and 65900/01, ECHR.
41- Supreme Holy Council of the Muslim Community v. Bulgaria, Application No. 39023/97, (16 December 2004).
42- Wingrove v. United Kingdom. Application No. 17419/90, (1997) 24 EHRR.
43- Case "relating to certain aspects of the laws on the use of languages in education in Belgium" Report of the Commission of 24th June 1965, Series B, No. 3.
44- Kokkinakis v. Greece. Application No. 14307/88, (1993).
45- Manoussakis and Others v. Greece, Application No. 18748/91, (26 September 1996), Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1996-IV.
46- Larissis and others v. Greece, Application Nos. 23372/94, 26377/94 and 26378/94, (Ser. A) No. 65 ECtHR (1998-V).
47- Lotus (France v Turkey) [1927] PCIJ Rep, Series A, No 10.
48- Mazurek v. France, No. 34406/97, ECHR 2000-II.
49- Interpretation of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, Advisory Opinion OC-10/89 of 14.07.1989, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R Series A, n. 10.
50- The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law, Concurring Opinion of Judge A.A. Cancado Trindade, Advisory Opinion OC-16/99, October 1, 1999, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (Ser A) No. 16 (1999).
51- Tyrer v. United Kingdom, Application No. 5856/72, 25 April 1978, Series A No. 26.
52- Fayed v. the United Kingdom, (21 September 1994).
53- Refah Partisi and Others v. Turkey, Applications Nos. 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98 and 41344/98, 31 July 2001/ Ibid, [GC], ECHR 2003-II.
54- Leyla Şahin v. Turkey, No. 44774/98, 29 June 2004 and Ibid.,[GC], No. 44774/98, ECHR 2005.
55- Vo v. France, Application No. 53924/00, 8 July 2004.
56- Öcalan v. Turkey, Application no. 46221/99, 12 May 2005.
57- Bayatyan v. Armenia, Application No. 23459/03, 27 October 2009.
58- Koppi v. Austria, Application No. 33001/03, 10 December 2009.
59- Tsavachidis v. Greece [GC], Application No. 28802/95, 21 January 1999.
60- Resul Taşdemir v. Turkey, application No. 38841/07, 23 February 2010.
61- Loizidou v. Turkey (preliminary objections), judgment of 23 March 1995, Series A No. 310.
62- Burden v. the United Kingdom [GC], Application No. 13378/05, 29 April 2008.
63- Al-Adsani v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 35763/97, 21 November 2001.
64- General comment No. 12: The right to adequate food (art. 11), Twentieth session (1999) Contained in UN Doc. E/C.12/1999/5. See UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 Vol. I, 2008.
65- General comment No. 14: The right to the highest attainable standard of health (art. 12), Twenty-second session (2000), UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 Vol. I, 2008.
66- General comment No. 15: The right to water (arts. 11 and 12 of the Covenant) Twenty-ninth session (2002), UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 Vol. I, 2008.
67- General comment No. 16: The equal right of men and women to the enjoyment of all economic, social and cultural rights (art. 3), Thirty-fourth session 2005, UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 Vol. I, 2008.
68- General comment No. 17: The right of everyone to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he or she is the author (art. 15), Thirty-fifth session (2005), Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 Vol. I, 2008.
69- General comment No. 18: The right to work (art. 6), Thirty-fifth session 2005, UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 Vol. I, 2008.
70- General comment No. 19: The right to social security (art. 9), Thirty-ninth session 2007,), UN Doc. HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 Vol. I, 2008.
)
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله