首页> 外文OA文献 >Legal opinion/expert report in the case of Rocio San Miguel Sosa and others v. Venezuela, case nr. 12.923, on request of the Inter-American Court on Human Rights : Expert report in the case of Rocio San Miguel Sosa and others v. Venezuela
【2h】

Legal opinion/expert report in the case of Rocio San Miguel Sosa and others v. Venezuela, case nr. 12.923, on request of the Inter-American Court on Human Rights : Expert report in the case of Rocio San Miguel Sosa and others v. Venezuela

机译:罗西奥·圣米格尔·索萨和其他人诉委内瑞拉案的法律意见/专家报告,案件nr。 12.923,应美洲人权法院的请求:Rocio san miguel sosa和其他人诉委内瑞拉案的专家报告

摘要

First the report examines the preliminary question whether signing a statement or a petition in a political context, such as a petition to carry out a recall referendum on the term of office of a head of state, is to be considered as an act of exercising the right to express a (political) opinion (by a civil servant or employee in the public sector), guaranteed by Article 19.2 ICCPR and/or Article 10 § 1 ECHR. Second it analyzes under what circumstances a termination of employment contract or dismissal of an employer or civil servant is to be regarded as an interference with the right to freedom of expression, and in particular in case the public authority or employer bring forward that the termination of contract or dismissal is unrelated to the exercise of the right to freedom of expression by the employee or civil servant.-Next this report will focus on the (limits of the) right to political freedom of expression in the employment relation, including the public sector, and on the (limitations of the) right to express political, critical or non-neutral opinions about the head of state, the government or other public institutions. Therefore it will elaborate on the criteria and conditions that may justify an interference with the right to (political) freedom of expression of public servants and employees in the public sector. It will also clarify in what circumstances an interference with this right amounts to a violation of Article 19 ICCPR or Article 10 ECHR, with references to the UN Human Rights Committee General Comment No. 34 “Article 19. Freedoms of opinion and expression” and especially analyzing and reporting the relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights.
机译:首先,报告审查了一个初步问题,即在政治背景下签署声明或请愿书,例如在国家元首的任期内进行罢免公投的请愿书,应被视为是行使政治权利的行为。 《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第19.2条和/或《欧洲人权公约》第10条第1款保障的(由公务员或公共部门雇员表达(政治)意见的权利。其次,它分析了在什么情况下终止劳动合同或解雇雇主或公务员被视为对言论自由权的干涉,特别是在公共当局或雇主提出终止雇佣关系的情况下。合同或解雇与雇员或公务员行使言论自由权无关。-接下来,本报告将着重于包括公共部门在内的雇佣关系中的政治言论自由权(的限制) ,以及关于(对国家元首,政府或其他公共机构的)政治,批评或非中立意见表达权利的((权利的)限制)。因此,它将详细阐述可证明有理由干涉公共部门公务员和雇员的(政治)表达自由权的标准和条件。它还将阐明在何种情况下对该权利的干涉等于违反了《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》第19条或《欧洲人权公约》第10条,并提及联合国人权事务委员会第34号一般性意见“第19条:见解和言论自由”,尤其是分析并报告欧洲人权法院的相关判例法。

著录项

  • 作者

    Voorhoof Dirk;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2017
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 入库时间 2022-08-31 16:07:51

相似文献

  • 外文文献

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号