發(fā)布時間：2018-04-25 15:14

  本文選題：個人申訴 + 人權法院�。� 參考：《山東大學》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：現(xiàn)代國家中,保障人權已經(jīng)成為一項國際共識,對人權的保護不僅僅是國內(nèi)法的重要內(nèi)容,是衡量一個國家法制完善與否的重要標志,是衡量一個國家是否實行法治的重要衡量手段：而且是國際法的重要內(nèi)容,而且相對于國內(nèi)法對人權保護的不完善的現(xiàn)狀相比,國際法尤其是區(qū)域法的步伐更為快一些。歐洲是人權思想的發(fā)源地,自古以來就一直有保護人權的傳統(tǒng)與實踐。而與此同時,兩次世界大戰(zhàn)都策源于歐洲,兩次世界大戰(zhàn)的教訓也促使人們認識到,只有保護人權,抑制專制與獨裁,才能保持長久的和平與安定。二戰(zhàn)后不久,在丘吉爾的號召下,西歐的戰(zhàn)勝國便建立了泛歐洲組織,1948年建立了歐洲理事會,并起草了《歐洲人權公約》,公約于1950年生效。根據(jù)歐洲人權公約建立了兩個人權保護的執(zhí)行機構,即歐洲人權委員會與歐洲人權法院。歐洲人權法院從建立到現(xiàn)在的日臻成熟階段,經(jīng)歷了以下幾個發(fā)展階段：首先是建立初期,歐洲人權法院于1959年建立,歐洲人權法院建立后,在人權的保護方面發(fā)揮了不可替代的作用,但由于第一是到歐洲人權法院申訴的增長使得案件的處理速度非常慢；締約國的增加使得這個問題變得更加嚴峻；第二是歐洲人權法院和歐洲人權委員會的非常設性與在審理程序上的重復導致審理速度緩慢；第三是成員國希望公約的監(jiān)督機構更具有獨立的司法機構的性質；第四是改善個人申訴的處境。于是1998年歐洲人權法院經(jīng)過改革進入了新的階段,也就是它的第二個階段,經(jīng)過改革,歐洲人權法院在以下幾個方面實現(xiàn)了突破：首先,也是最主要的,是關于個人方面的,個人有權直接提出申訴,而無需有關成員國聲明接受。通過這一改革,使得個人的人權申訴現(xiàn)狀得以較大改善。因為它給與個人以完全的訴權,從而也使得人權法院成為名副其實的保護人權的機構；其次是法院由臨時性變?yōu)槌ＴO性的,因而有助于案件的快速高效率的審理；第三是控制體系的三合為一,完全司法化。改革撤銷了委員會,并取消了部長委員會在決定案件方面的權力,將其限定為監(jiān)督法院判決的執(zhí)行。設立由常設法官組成的、由法官助理協(xié)助的唯一的常設法院。然而1998年的改革在人權法院實施了6年之后仍然有許多難以克服的問題,其中加強國內(nèi)救濟以減少案件的數(shù)量以及如何能夠更快捷的篩選案件以及處理案件等問題亟待解救,于是在多方的呼聲下,2004年歐洲人權法院進行了第二次改革,雖然歐洲人權法院經(jīng)過兩次改革已經(jīng)取得了長足的進步,但是仍然存在著這樣那樣的的問題,最突出的問題便是案件的積壓問題仍然很突出,但是,盡管如此,歐洲人權法院的模式對于各國人民更好的保護自己的人權有著重要的作用,對于人權現(xiàn)狀較為一般的中國來說,更具有價值和意義；仿照歐洲人權法院的模型,現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)建立了非洲人權法院與美洲人權法院,有學者建議,亞洲人權法院的建立也應該指日可待,那么在建立亞洲人權法院的時候,歐洲人權法院,尤其是歐洲人權法院中的個人申訴機制對于我們?nèi)蘸蠼�立亞洲人權法院以及亞洲人權法院的個人申訴機制更具有參考價值與借鑒意義!
[Abstract]:In modern countries, the protection of human rights has become an international consensus. The protection of human rights is not only an important part of domestic law, but also an important symbol to measure the perfection of a country's legal system. It is an important measure to measure the rule of law in a country. It is also an important content of international law and is relative to human rights in domestic law. In comparison with the imperfect situation of protection, the pace of international law, especially the regional law, is more rapid. Europe is the birthplace of human rights ideas, and since ancient times there has been a tradition and practice of protecting human rights. At the same time, the two world war has been rooted in Europe, and the lessons of the two world war have also prompted people to realize that only the protection of human rights is known. Under the call of Churchill, the European Council established the European Council in 1948, and the European Convention on human rights was drafted and the Convention entered into force in 1950. Two executive machines for the protection of human rights were established in accordance with the European Convention on human rights. The European Human Rights Court (European Human Rights Commission) and the European Court of human rights (European Court of human rights) have experienced the following stages of development from the establishment of the European Court of human rights to the present. First, the European Court of human rights was established in 1959. After the establishment of the European Court of human rights, the European Court of human rights has played an irreplaceable role in the protection of human rights, but it is the first one. The increase in the appeal of the European Court of human rights has made the handling of the case very slow; the increase in the State Party has made the problem more serious; second is the very low speed of the European human rights court and the European Commission on human rights in the trial procedure; and the third is that member states want the supervision of the Convention. The organization has a more independent nature of the judiciary; fourth is to improve the situation of individual complaints. In 1998, the European Court of human rights entered a new stage, that is, its second stages. After the reform, the European Court of human rights has achieved breakthroughs in the following aspects: first, and most important, on the individual aspects. The individual has the right to direct a complaint directly without the need for a declaration by the member states. Through this reform, the individual's human rights appeal has been greatly improved, because it gives the individual a complete litigious right and makes the court of human rights a real institution for the protection of human rights; secondly, the court has changed from temporary to permanent nature. As a result, it contributes to the quick and efficient trial of the case; third is the three of the control system and the complete judicature. The reform revoked the Committee and abolished the authority of the Council of ministers to determine the case, and limited it to the enforcement of the court's judgment. The Permanent Court of justice. However, the 1998 reform still has many unconquered problems after the implementation of the human rights court for 6 years. The issue of strengthening domestic relief to reduce the number of cases and how to be able to screen cases and deal with cases is urgently needed to be saved. In many cases, the European Court of human rights in 2004 has carried out in the voice of the European Court of human rights. In the second reform, although the European Court of human rights has made great progress after two reforms, the problem still exists, and the most prominent problem is that the backlog of cases is still outstanding, however, the model of the European Court of human rights is better for the people of all countries to protect their human rights. The important role is of greater value and significance for China, which is more common to the human rights situation. Following the model of the European Court of human rights, the African human rights court and the American court of human rights have now been established, and some scholars suggest that the establishment of the Asian court of human rights should also be available, and then, when the Asian human rights court is established, Europe will be established. The personal appeal mechanism of the human rights court, especially the European Court of human rights, has more reference value and reference for the establishment of the individual appeals mechanism of the Asian human rights court and the Asian human rights court in the future.

【學位授予單位】：山東大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D998.2

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 畢道俊;;試論人權公約中的締約國報告程序[J];安慶師范學院學報(社會科學版);2006年05期

2 張學哲;;歐洲法院在歐洲一體化中的作用——對歐洲法院有關公司法裁決的分析[J];比較法研究;2008年01期

3 賀鑒;論歐洲人權保護中的個人申訴制度及其對非洲的借鑒作用[J];當代法學;2002年01期

4 尹雪梅;;歐洲人權法院——超國家的人權保護法律機構[J];中國司法;2006年07期

5 馬桂瑛;;聯(lián)合國人權機構改革之淺見——對人權理事會和人權委員會的比較分析[J];西華師范大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2006年06期

6 李晶珠,王偉,趙海峰;非洲人權與民族權法院 國際人權保護體制的新篇章[J];法律適用;2005年06期

7 趙海峰;竇玉前;;保護人權與提高效率的平衡 歐洲人權法院2004年改革評析[J];法律適用;2006年Z1期

8 張英;論歐洲法院的初步裁決程序[J];法商研究(中南政法學院學報);2001年04期

9 黎爾平;國際人權保護機制的構成及發(fā)展趨勢[J];法商研究;2005年05期

10 洪永紅,賀鑒;非洲人權法院對歐美人權法院的借鑒——個體和非政府組織參與人權訴訟[J];法學雜志;2002年06期

相關重要報紙文章 前5條

1 英國埃塞克斯大學人權法中心研究員 Wim Muller邋中國人民大學博士生 劉中琦 譯;[N];法制日報;2007年

2 李永君;[N];檢察日報;2003年

3 李永君;[N];檢察日報;2003年

4 范思泓;[N];人民法院報;2003年

5 張 華;[N];人民法院報;2005年

相關碩士學位論文 前10條

1 張蕾;歐洲聯(lián)盟的法律淵源及其效力原則研究[D];中國政法大學;2001年

2 涂平一;人權國際保護制度的發(fā)展與實踐[D];大連海事大學;2000年

3 唐伯軍;論歐洲人權司法機制下的用盡當?shù)鼐葷��?guī)則[D];中國政法大學;2003年

4 賀鑒;區(qū)域性人權保護研究[D];湘潭大學;2003年

5 李卓婭;歐洲人權法及其理論思考[D];西南政法大學;2005年

6 曹陽;歐洲人權法院判例法中的公正審判[D];四川大學;2005年

7 姜鐵敬;國際人權兩公約與我國憲法的比較研究[D];大連海事大學;2003年

8 孫立格;論歐洲法院的管轄權及其獨特性[D];河北師范大學;2006年

9 王東;人權國際保護的概念及實施途徑[D];中國海洋大學;2006年

10 陳荔;聯(lián)合國人權理事會研究[D];上海交通大學;2007年

，

本文編號：1801865