期刊文献+

欧洲人权法院视野中的“当场击毙”及其启示

On “Shooting Someone Dead on Sight” from the Perspective of European Human Rights Court and Its Enlightenment
下载PDF
导出
摘要 《欧洲人权公约》中有关生命权的规定包含有"当场击毙"的内容,即依照"绝对必需"标准,在法定情形下,执法人员有权使用武力乃至剥夺他人的生命。欧洲人权法院在一系列案件裁判中认为:使用武力要综合考虑所有情况;各缔约国的国内立法的替代性规定要切实有效;对"绝对必需"标准的审查要严格贯彻比例性要求;对相关案件要设立足够的调查程序并且要形成机制。欧洲人权法院的裁判体现了平等适用法律的原则,原则性与灵活性相结合的原则以及公正与效率相结合的原则。这些有益经验对我国的"当场击毙"法律规制具有借鉴意义。 Regulations concerning protection of life in European Human Rights Convention include such ideas as “shooting someone dead on sight”, namely, law enforcement offcials may be allowed to use force , even to deprive of life under the legal condi-tion according to the standard of “absolutely necessary”.In judging a series of cases , European Human Rights Court claims that all things must be taken into consideration when using force;substitute principles of national legislation in all signatory states must be ef -fective;review of "absolutely necessary"standard must be conducted under proportional requirments;relevant cases must be guaran-teed by sufficient investigative procedures which are to form stable system .The judgment of European Human Rights Court exhibits the principles of equality in law , the combination of principles and flexibilities , and justice inseparable from efficiency .The above benefi-cial experiences may be applied to Chinese laws and regulations of "shooting someone dead on sight".
作者 余为青
出处 《阜阳师范学院学报(社会科学版)》 2014年第6期89-94,共6页 Journal of Fuyang Normal University:Social Science Edition
基金 安徽省哲学社会科学规划项目"新刑事诉讼法中的证人作证制度立法和实施问题研究"(AHSK11-12D228) 安徽高校省级人文社会科学研究项目"刑事诉讼平等论"(2010sk339)
关键词 欧洲人权法院 欧洲人权公约 当场击毙 程序保护 European Human Rights Court European Human Rights Convention shooting someone dead on sight procedural protection
  • 相关文献

参考文献21

  • 1Mc Cann and Others v.United Kingdom:(1996)21E.H.R.R.97.
  • 2[英]克莱尔·奥维、罗宾·怀特.欧洲人权法原则与判例(第三版)[M].何志鹏,孙璐,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2006:508.
  • 3Soering v.United Kingdom(A/16):(1989)11 E.H.R.R.439,para.87.
  • 4Loizidou v.Turkey(A/310):(1995)20 E.H.R.R.99,para.72.
  • 5Soering v.United Kingdom(A/16):(1989)11 E.H.R.R.439,para.88.
  • 6No.10044/82,Stewart v.United Kingdom,Dec.10.7.84,para.169-171.
  • 7James v.United Kingdom(A/98):(1986)8 E.H.R.R.123,para.84.
  • 8Holy Monasteries v.Greece(A/301-A):(1995)20 E.H.R.R.1,para.90.
  • 9Klass v.Germany(A/28)2 E.H.R.R.439,para.33.
  • 10Mc Cann and Others v.United Kingdom:(1996)21E.H.R.R.97,para.154-155.

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部