The privacy observance of home, correspondence and conversations in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights with a glance to Iran’s criminal procedure law

Alireza Taghipour

Abstract


87

Privacy is a prevalent concept but almost unknown meaning that there has not been any exact and comprehensive definition regarding. In article 8 of the European convention of human rights, without any definition on this phrase, the Instances of this privacy have been introduced by the terms of private life, family life, home and correspondence.

The European court of human rights as the convention commentator institution, Meanwhile expanding the instances of home and correspondence has allowed the member states to intervene individuals home and correspondence, on the basis of supporting the society if necessary, based on law and in the event of the determined aims in article 8 of European convention. Although the presented comments and case law of European court in this context shows that in contrast of individuals rights with the interests of society, superiority is marked In favor of the rights of individuals.

In the present article in a descriptive-analytic fashioned way by considering decisions of the European Court of protection of human rights and by the aim of comparing that with Iranian criminal procedure provisions in the privacy of home, correspondence and conversations we reached to conclusion that although the Iranian legislator has tried to show his commitment to respect the rights of individuals, but the ambiguity of some phrases and the broad powers granted to the judicial authority has caused the rights and freedoms of individuals to be in the exposure of danger, In this respect, Requires amendments in the code of Criminal Procedure as the amendment of article 60 in determining sanction for the police abuse, amendment of article 140 by way of expanding night search and amendment of article 144 about determining instances of army forces presence.

Please cite this article as: Taghipour A. The privacy observance of home, correspondence and conversations in the case law of The European Court of Human Rights with a glance to Iran’s criminal procedure law. Bioeth J Q 2016; 6(21): 177-199.


Keywords


Human Rights; Privacy; European Courts; Home; Correspondence

Full Text:

PDF

65

References


Ansari B. Privacy and protection of it in Islam, Comparative and Iran. Tehran. Journal of Faculty of Law and Political Science 2004; 66: 1-54. [persian]

Forooghi F, Borji MN, Moslehi J. The Foundations of ban violates the privacy rights of Iran and America. University of Shiraz: Journal of Legal Studies 2014; 3: 137-172. [Persian]

Moosazadeh E, Mustafazadeh F. A glance at the concept and principles of the right to privacy under common law. Public law examinations quarterly 2012; 2: 45-67. [persian]

Asbild S. The origins of the universal declaration of human rights. Edited by Gudmundur A, Eide A. The universal declaration of human rights: A common standard of achievement. The Hague: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 1999. p.3.

Joseph S, Jenny S, Melissa C. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: cases, materials and commentary. 3th ed.New York: Oxford University Press; 2013. p.14.

Giacca G. Economic, social and cultural rights in armed conflict. 1th published.New York: Oxford university press; 2014. p.54.

Detrick S. A commentary on the United Nations convention on the rights of the child. The Hague: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 1999. p.275-276.

Pasqualucci JM. The practice and procedure of the inter-american court of human rights. 2th ed. Edinburgh: Cambridge university press; 2013. p.3-4.

Tinta MF. The landmark rulings of the inter-american court of human rights on the rights of the child: protecting the most vulnerable at the edge. Leiden: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 2008. p.256.

Brems E. Human rights: universality and diversity. The Hague: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 2001. p.92.

Schabas WA. The European convention on human rights: A commentary. First published.New York: Oxford university press; 2015. p.9, 14.

Mendel T, puddeohatt A, wagner B, hawtin D, towers N. Global survey on internet privacy and freedom of expression. Paris: UNESCO publishing; 2012. p.55.

Fenwick H. Civil liberties and human rights. 3th ed.New York: Cavendish publishing limited; 2002. p.68.

Beloff M. What does it all means? Interpreting the European human rights convention 1998. Edited by Betten L. The human rights act 1998: what it means? The incorporation of the European convention on human rights into the legal order of the United Kingdom. The Hague: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 1999. p.39.

Henrard K. Devising an Adequate System of Minority Protection: Individual Human Rights, Minority Rights and the Right to Self-Determination. The Hague: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 2000. p.133.

Tischler HL. Introduction to sociology. 11th ed. Belmont: Cengage learning publication; 2014. p.360.

Martin FF, Schnably S, Wilson RJ, Simon J, Tushnet M. International human rights and humanitarian law, treaties, cases and analysis. 1th published. New York: Cambridge university press; 2006. p.789.

Mcfarlane B, Hopkins N, Nield S. Land law, text cases and materials. 2th ed.Hampshire: Oxford university press; 2012. p.101.

Maringele S. European Human Rights Law: The work of European Court of Human Rights illustrated by an assortment of selected cases. Hamburg: Anchor academic publishing; 2014. p.56.

Harris DJ, oboyle M, Bates EP, Buckley EM. Law of the European convention on human rights. 3th ed.New York: Oxford university press; 2014. p.529, 556.

Letsas G. Rescuing proportionality. Edited by Cruft R, Liao SM, Renzo M. Philosophical foundations of human rights.New York: Oxford university press; 2015. p.335.

Rainey B, Wicks E, Ovey CJ. White and ovey: the European convention on human rights. 6th edition.New York: Oxford university press; 2014. p.336, 408.

Goldouzian I. Private criminal law. 12th ed. Tehran: Tehran University Publications; 2006. p.238. [Persian]

Mir Mohammad Sadeghi H. Crimes against property and ownership. 6th ed. Tehran: Mizan Publication; 1999. p.300. [Persian]

Paad E. The law of criminal investigations. 1th Published. Tehran: National University Publications; 1973. p.268. [Persian]

Clayton G. Text book on immigration and asylum law. 7th ed.New York: Oxford university press; 2016. p.172.

Karanja SK. Transparency and Proportionality in the Schengen Information System and border control co-operation. Leiden: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 2008. p.214.

Kleijkamp GA. Family life and family interests. 1th published. London: Kluwer law international; 1999. p.43.

Emmerson B, Ashworth A, Macdonald A. human rights and criminal justice. 3th ed. London: Sweet and Maxwell; 2012. p.133.

Kempess P. A Systematic Guide to the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights, 1997-1998. 1th published. London: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 2000. Vol.5 p.447.

De frias AS. Counter-terrorism and human rights in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Strasbourg: Council of Europe publishing; 2012. p.129.

Dutertre G. Key case-law extracts: European court of human rights. Strasbourg: Council of Europe publishing; 2003. p.287.

Crawshaw R, Holmstrom L. Essential cases on human rights for the police: reviews and summaries of international cases. Leiden: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 2006. p.301.

Ashouri M. Criminal Procedure. 6th ed. Tehran: Samt Publications; 2005. Vol.2 p.137. [Persian]

Rahmdel M. Criminal procedure. 2th ed. Tehran: Dadgostar publications; 2015. Vol.2 p.59, 63. [Persian]

Klamberg M. A paradigm shift in Swedish electronic surveillance law. Edited by Akrivopoulou C, Garipidis A. Digital democracy and the impact of technology on governance and politics: new globalized practices. Pennsylvania: Information science reference; 2013. p.182.

Reid K. A practitioner's guide to the European convention on human rights. 4th ed. London: Sweet and Maxwell; 2011. p.579.

Slapper G, Kelly D. English legal system. 10th ed. New York: Cavendish publishing; 2009. p.626.

Lindley B, herring J, Wyld N. Public law children's cases: whose decision is it anyway? Edited by Herring J. Family law, issues, debates, policy. 1th published. London: Willan publishing; 2001. p.189.

Takahashi Ya. The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Principle of Proportionality in jurisprudence of the ECHR. Antwerp: Intersentia publishing; 2001. p.74.

Fink U. Protection of privacy in the EU, individual rights and legal instruments. Edited by Witzleb N, Lindsay D, Paterson M, Rodrick S. Emerging Challenges in Privacy Law Comparative Perspectives. London: Cambridge university press; 2014. p.88.

Lautenbach G. The concept of the rule of law and the European court of human rights. 1th published. New York:Oxford university press; 2013. p.100.

Jackson DW. The United Kingdom confronts the European convention on human rights. Gainesville: University press of Florida; 1997. p.72.

Bartlet P, Lewis O, Thorold O. Mental disability and the European convention on human rights. Leiden: Martinus nijhoff publishers; 2007. p.103.

Ramage S. English prison law. New York: I universe inc; 2009. p.162.

Easton S. prisoner's rights: principles and practice. 1th published. New York: Routledge; 2011. p.124.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22037/bj.v6i21.14709

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

 

 

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License CC BY-NC 4.0. Copyright © 2016 Bioethics Journal (Quarterly). All rights reserved.  All credits and honors to PKP for their OJS.

For Author | Online Submission | About Contact