Žmogaus teisiu turinio dichotomine dilema

Translated title of the contribution: A dichotomic dilemma of the content of human rights

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The article analyses the significance of different conceptions in disclosing the content of a concrete human right or freedom. It is stated that there exists a permanent "individualistic" and " collectivistic" dichotomy of human rights and freedoms. Such a dichotomy has its support in philosophy and law. It is recognised that even in democratic states the discourse on the expression of the content of human rights is in a continuous dichotomic balance - ideological competition. It is stated that the western (liberal) theory of human rights, when deciding the issue of the content of a human right, tends to give priority to the interest of a concrete person, but not that arising from a group of persons. The discourse of the article is illustrated with case-law examples of institutions of constitutional jurisdiction in some countries. These examples clearly prove the actual validity of the dichotomic balance. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a unique phenomenon in the history of humankind, which ensured a longterm perspective for the entrenchment of human rights and freedoms. The article also underlines the exceptional significance of the European Court of Human Rights for understanding the content of human rights and freedoms and for the unique character of this institution in deciding the dichotomic theorem of the problematics of the content of human rights and freedoms. The procedure for formation (i), the powers (ii) and the obligatoriness of judgments (iii) of the European Court of Human Rights make the European process for defence of human rights and freedoms exceptionally valuable from the perspective of development of the civilization. It must be recognised that the humanity has never had such instruments of protection of human rights and freedoms. The European Court of Human Rights has become a source shaping the standard of human rights and freedoms and continually deciding the permanent dichotomic dilemma of a balance between individualism and collectivism.

Original languageLithuanian
Pages (from-to)109-123
Number of pages15
JournalLogos (Lithuania)
Issue number72
Publication statusPublished - 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

human rights
Human Rights
Human Freedom
collectivism
human being
discourse
individualism
case law
civilization
jurisdiction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities(all)
  • Cultural Studies

Cite this

Žmogaus teisiu turinio dichotomine dilema. / Mesonis, Gediminas.

In: Logos (Lithuania), No. 72, 2012, p. 109-123.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{b02455ecab164983918a7557fef946a3,
title = "Žmogaus teisiu turinio dichotomine dilema",
abstract = "The article analyses the significance of different conceptions in disclosing the content of a concrete human right or freedom. It is stated that there exists a permanent {"}individualistic{"} and {"} collectivistic{"} dichotomy of human rights and freedoms. Such a dichotomy has its support in philosophy and law. It is recognised that even in democratic states the discourse on the expression of the content of human rights is in a continuous dichotomic balance - ideological competition. It is stated that the western (liberal) theory of human rights, when deciding the issue of the content of a human right, tends to give priority to the interest of a concrete person, but not that arising from a group of persons. The discourse of the article is illustrated with case-law examples of institutions of constitutional jurisdiction in some countries. These examples clearly prove the actual validity of the dichotomic balance. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a unique phenomenon in the history of humankind, which ensured a longterm perspective for the entrenchment of human rights and freedoms. The article also underlines the exceptional significance of the European Court of Human Rights for understanding the content of human rights and freedoms and for the unique character of this institution in deciding the dichotomic theorem of the problematics of the content of human rights and freedoms. The procedure for formation (i), the powers (ii) and the obligatoriness of judgments (iii) of the European Court of Human Rights make the European process for defence of human rights and freedoms exceptionally valuable from the perspective of development of the civilization. It must be recognised that the humanity has never had such instruments of protection of human rights and freedoms. The European Court of Human Rights has become a source shaping the standard of human rights and freedoms and continually deciding the permanent dichotomic dilemma of a balance between individualism and collectivism.",
keywords = "Dichotomic dilemma, Human rights and freedoms, The European Court of Human Rights",
author = "Gediminas Mesonis",
year = "2012",
language = "Lithuanian",
pages = "109--123",
journal = "Logos (Lithuania)",
issn = "0868-7692",
publisher = "Visuomenine organizacija {"}LOGOS{"}",
number = "72",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Žmogaus teisiu turinio dichotomine dilema

AU - Mesonis, Gediminas

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - The article analyses the significance of different conceptions in disclosing the content of a concrete human right or freedom. It is stated that there exists a permanent "individualistic" and " collectivistic" dichotomy of human rights and freedoms. Such a dichotomy has its support in philosophy and law. It is recognised that even in democratic states the discourse on the expression of the content of human rights is in a continuous dichotomic balance - ideological competition. It is stated that the western (liberal) theory of human rights, when deciding the issue of the content of a human right, tends to give priority to the interest of a concrete person, but not that arising from a group of persons. The discourse of the article is illustrated with case-law examples of institutions of constitutional jurisdiction in some countries. These examples clearly prove the actual validity of the dichotomic balance. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a unique phenomenon in the history of humankind, which ensured a longterm perspective for the entrenchment of human rights and freedoms. The article also underlines the exceptional significance of the European Court of Human Rights for understanding the content of human rights and freedoms and for the unique character of this institution in deciding the dichotomic theorem of the problematics of the content of human rights and freedoms. The procedure for formation (i), the powers (ii) and the obligatoriness of judgments (iii) of the European Court of Human Rights make the European process for defence of human rights and freedoms exceptionally valuable from the perspective of development of the civilization. It must be recognised that the humanity has never had such instruments of protection of human rights and freedoms. The European Court of Human Rights has become a source shaping the standard of human rights and freedoms and continually deciding the permanent dichotomic dilemma of a balance between individualism and collectivism.

AB - The article analyses the significance of different conceptions in disclosing the content of a concrete human right or freedom. It is stated that there exists a permanent "individualistic" and " collectivistic" dichotomy of human rights and freedoms. Such a dichotomy has its support in philosophy and law. It is recognised that even in democratic states the discourse on the expression of the content of human rights is in a continuous dichotomic balance - ideological competition. It is stated that the western (liberal) theory of human rights, when deciding the issue of the content of a human right, tends to give priority to the interest of a concrete person, but not that arising from a group of persons. The discourse of the article is illustrated with case-law examples of institutions of constitutional jurisdiction in some countries. These examples clearly prove the actual validity of the dichotomic balance. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms is a unique phenomenon in the history of humankind, which ensured a longterm perspective for the entrenchment of human rights and freedoms. The article also underlines the exceptional significance of the European Court of Human Rights for understanding the content of human rights and freedoms and for the unique character of this institution in deciding the dichotomic theorem of the problematics of the content of human rights and freedoms. The procedure for formation (i), the powers (ii) and the obligatoriness of judgments (iii) of the European Court of Human Rights make the European process for defence of human rights and freedoms exceptionally valuable from the perspective of development of the civilization. It must be recognised that the humanity has never had such instruments of protection of human rights and freedoms. The European Court of Human Rights has become a source shaping the standard of human rights and freedoms and continually deciding the permanent dichotomic dilemma of a balance between individualism and collectivism.

KW - Dichotomic dilemma

KW - Human rights and freedoms

KW - The European Court of Human Rights

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84873370570&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84873370570&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84873370570

SP - 109

EP - 123

JO - Logos (Lithuania)

JF - Logos (Lithuania)

SN - 0868-7692

IS - 72

ER -