Главная страницаZaki.ru законы и право Поиск законов поиск по сайту Каталог документов каталог документов Добавить в избранное добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное




Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 21.10.2010 «Дело Алексеев (Alekseyev) против России» [англ.]





f a democratic society. Democracy, the Court has stressed, is the only political model contemplated in the Convention and the only one compatible with it. By virtue of the wording of the second paragraph of Article 11, and likewise of Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Convention, the only necessity capable of justifying an interference with any of the rights enshrined in those Articles is one that may claim to spring from a "democratic society" (see Refah Partisi (the Welfare Party) and Others v. Turkey [GC], Nos. 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98 and 41344/98, §§ 86 - 89, ECHR 2003-II, and Christian Democratic People's Party, [cited above]).
62. While in the context of Article 11 the Court has often referred to the essential role played by political parties in ensuring pluralism and democracy, associations formed for other purposes are also important to the proper functioning of democracy. For pluralism is also built on genuine recognition of, and respect for, diversity and the dynamics of cultural traditions, ethnic and cultural identities, religious beliefs and artistic, literary and socio-economic ideas and concepts. The harmonious interaction of persons and groups with varied identities is essential for achieving social cohesion. It is only natural that, where a civil society functions in a healthy manner, the participation of citizens in the democratic process is to a large extent achieved through belonging to associations in which they may integrate with each other and pursue common objectives collectively (see Gorzelik and Others v. Poland [GC], No. 44158/98, § 92, ECHR 2004-I).
63. Referring to the hallmarks of a "democratic society", the Court has attached particular importance to pluralism, tolerance and broadmindedness. In that context, it has held that although individual interests must on occasion be subordinated to those of a group, democracy does not simply mean that the views of the majority must always prevail: a balance must be achieved which ensures the fair and proper treatment of minorities and avoids any abuse of a dominant position (see Young, James and Webster v. the United Kingdom, 13 August 1981, Series A No. 44, § 63, and Chassagnou and Others v. France [GC], Nos. 25088/95 and 28443/95, § 112, ECHR 1999-III).
64. In Informationsverein Lentia and Others v. Austria (24 November 1993, § 38, Series A No. 276) the Court described the State as the ultimate guarantor of the principle of pluralism. Genuine and effective respect for freedom of association and assembly cannot be reduced to a mere duty on the part of the State not to interfere; a purely negative conception would not be compatible with the purpose of Article 11 nor with that of the Convention in general. There may thus be positive obligations to secure the effective enjoyment of these freedoms (see Wilson and the National Union of Journalists and Others v. the United Kingdom, Nos. 30668/96, 30671/96 and 30678/96, § 41, ECHR 2002-V, and Ouranio Toxo v Greece, No. 74989/01, § 37, ECHR 2005-X). This obligation is of particular importance for persons holding unpopular views or belonging to minorities, because they are more vulnerable to victimisation."
71. Turning to the circumstances of the present case, the Court observes that the Government put forward two reasons for imposing the ban on the events organised by the applicant.
72. Their first argument, which also formed the ground on which the events were banned by the domestic authorities, related to concerns for the participants' safety and to the prevention of disorder. They alleged that the Moscow authorities, having received numerous protest petitions, had realised that any such event would cause a large-scale controversy with various groups who objected to any demonstrations supporting or promoting the interests of lesbians, gays or other sexual minorities. The petitions cited by the Government (paragraph 62 above), however, were not all of i



> 1 2 3 ... 11 12 13 ... 19 20 21

Поделиться:

Опубликовать в своем блоге livejournal.com
0.1325 с