Basis for the criticism to the European Court of Human Rights in the case Del Río Prada v. Spain
Keywords:
Del Río Prada, European Convention of Human Rights, European Court of Human Rights, conditions of exercise of its functions, execution of judgmentsAbstract
The statements and criticisms regarding the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights on October 21 2013 in Del Rio Prada v. Spain through the media went beyond the arguments of Grand Chamber, to raise issues such as the role played by the Spanish judge or even the disobedience to Strasbourg. All these reviews result in significant legal questions regarding the role of the European Court of Human Rights as an international mechanism for the protection of human rights, the conditions of exercise of its functions by the judges, or the nature and execution of judgments.Beyond the decision of the Court itself and the facts and arguments on which it is based, this paper focuses on the analysis of these issues in finding the legal arguments underlying the criticism of the sentence in the case of Del Río Prada v. Spain.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Downloads
How to Cite
Cacho Sánchez, Y. (2015). Basis for the criticism to the European Court of Human Rights in the case Del Río Prada v. Spain. Revista De Derecho Comunitario Europeo, (48), 491–525. Retrieved from https://recyt.fecyt.es/index.php/RDCE/article/view/39247
Issue
Section
STUDIES
License
Copyright
Submission of a manuscript to the RDCE implies having read and accepted the journal's editorial guidelines and instructions for authors. When a work is accepted for publication, it is understood that the author grants the RDCE exclusive rights of reproduction, distribution and, where appropriate, sale of his manuscript for exploitation in all countries of the world in printed version, as well as any other magnetic, optical and digital media.
Authors shall transfer the publishing rights of their manuscript to RDCE so that it may be disseminated and capitalised on Intranets, the Internet and any web portals and wireless devices that the publisher may decide, by placing it at the disposal of users so that the latter may consult it online and extract content from it, print it and/or download and save it. These activities must comply with the terms and conditions outlined on the website hosting the work. However, the RDCE authorises authors of papers published in the journal to include a copy of these papers, once published, on their personal websites and/or other open access digital repositories. Copies must include a specific mention of RDCE, citing the year and issue of the journal in which the article was published, and adding a link to the RDCE website(s).
A year after its publication, the works of the RDCE will be under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivative 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which allows third parties to share the work as long as its author and its first publication is indicated, without the right to commercial exploitation and the elaboration of derivative works.
Plagiarism and scientific fraud
The publication of work that infringes on intellectual property rights is the sole responsibility of the authors, including any conflicts that may occur regarding infringement of copyright. This includes, most importantly, conflicts related to the commission of plagiarism and/or scientific fraud.
Practices constituting scientific plagiarism are as follows:
1. Presenting the work of others as your own.
2. Adopting words or ideas from other authors without due recognition.
3. Not using quotation marks or another distinctive format to distinguish literal quotations.
4. Giving incorrect information about the true source of a citation.
5. The paraphrasing of a source without mentioning the source.
6. Excessive paraphrasing, even if the source is mentioned.
Practices constituting scientific fraud are as follows:
1. Fabrication, falsification or omission of data and plagiarism.
2. Duplicate publication.
3. Conflicts of authorship.
Warning
Any breach of these Rules shall constitute a ground for rejection of the manuscript submitted.
