The European Court of Human Rights was established by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and was set up in Strasbourg in 1959. The Convention, which was drawn up by the Council of Europe in 1950, was inspired by the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 and protects many essential rights as the right to life, freedom from torture and slavery, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, the right to marry and found a family, freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and the right to a fair trial. Only states which are parties to the Convention and the European Commission of Human Rights have the right to bring a case before the Court. Some states have incorporated the Convention into domestic law, but Britain has not, so that it is not directly enforceable as British law.
STATE JURISDICTION
International law has traditionally recognized right of states to exercise jurisdiction on a number of grounds. The most common grounds are the territorial principle, the nationality principle, the protective or security principle and the principle of universality. According to this finally accepted traditional ground of jurisdiction a state has jurisdiction to try and punish private individuals for certain offences recognized by the international community as being of universal concern. Although the exact scope of this principle is yet undefined, offences which fall within this scope include hijacking, piracy, genocide and war crimes.
Trafficking in narcotics has not yet been defined as international crime. Unlike hijacking, where a series of multilateral treaties allow a number of states to try individuals for that offence, drug smuggling has been the subject mainly of bilateral agreements relating to police cooperation and enforcement. At the same time there is little doubt that there is not sufficient state practice to declare drug smuggling an international crime in customary law.
II. Ответьте на вопросы.
1. When and where was the European Court of Human Rights established?
2. What document declares the most essential human rights and freedoms?
3. What offences fall under jurisdiction of the International Law?
4. Which serious crime has not been yet defined as international crime?
5. What crime is the subject of agreements between countries?
III. Прочитайте следующие утверждения и решите, какие из них правильные, какие –нет.
1. The Declaration of Human Rights protects all human rights.
2. All states have the right to bring a case before the European Court of Human Rights.
3. A state has jurisdiction to try and punish for genocide.
4. Police cooperate on drug smuggling.
5. Britain incorporated the Convention in the domestic law.
IV. Подберите к следующим словам и словосочетаниям правильный русский перевод
| 1. freedom of conscience | a. воздушное пиратство |
| 2. fair trial | b. обычное право |
| 3. hijacking | c. свобода совести |
| 4. bilateral agreements | d. двусторонние соглашения |
| 5. customary law | e. справедливый суд |
V. Поставьте глаголы, данные в скобках, в соответствующем времени и переведите предложения на русский язык.
1. Last September the police … (to find) Binion lying on his living-room floor, dead at 55 of a massive drug overdose.
2. Capital punishment … (to carry out) by hanging, electrocution, gassing, lethal injection, beheading or shooting.
3. 18 countries of the world … already … (to abolish) capital punishment.
4. Many people are sure that capital punishment … (to diminish) the percents of violent crimes in future.
5. I don’t believe that the death penalty … (to deter) from committing violent crimes.
VI. Вставьте подходящие по смыслу слова или словосочетания в предложения.
1. The … was established by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
2. International law has traditionally … right of states to exercise jurisdiction on a number of grounds.
3. Trafficking in … has not yet been defined as international crime.
4. Drug smuggling has been the … of bilateral agreements.
5. There is little doubt that there is not sufficient state practice to declare drug smuggling an international crime in … law.
ВАРИАНТ 11
I. Прочитайте и письменно переведите текст.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
One way of protecting the suspected criminal is by dividing the stages in criminal procedure between different bodies. One can separate the functions of investigating, prosecuting, trying, deciding guilt, sentencing and carrying out the sentence. Six or seven different bodies can each be given one of these jobs.
For example, the police can be in charge of investigating the crime; a prosecution service of prosecuting; the judges of presiding over the trial; a jury of deciding whether to convict; an appeal court of settling whether the trial was fair; a prison service of carrying out the sentence if the suspect is convicted and sentenced to prison.
The judge who presides over the trial usually sentences the suspect if he is convicted, but even that is not inevitable. Sentencing can be entrusted to a special board. Or a judge can be put in charge of the investigation and a different judge chosen to try the case if the first judge finds there is enough evidence to justify the trial.
This is separation of powers. The idea is that no one authority (police, prosecution, judge, jury, prison service) should have too much power. The police will not be able to prosecute unless they can persuade the prosecution service that there is a strong case. The judge will if necessary rule at the trial that the prosecution has not produced enough evidence. If the jury think the judge has shown a bias during the trial they will probably acquit the suspect. If the suspect is convicted but thinks the procedure has been unfair he can persuade the government to advise the head of the state to pardon him or reduce the sentence.
II. Ответьте на вопросы.
1. How many bodies participate in criminal procedure?
2. What organ can sentencing be entrusted to?
3. Are police able to prosecute?
4. What will the jury probably do if they think the judge has shown a bias?
5. Who advises the head of the state to pardon the suspect?