CASE LAW OF THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS: CRITERIA FOR PROVIDENCE “BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT”

Abstract

Based on the generalization of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the conditions of detention of prisoners (detainees), the right to the meaning of arterial security values “beyond a reasonable doubt” is revealed. Features of improving the use of communication standards in support, sources of these standards and the procedural aspect of using this criterion to optimally assess the circumstances of the case and establish the violation of fundamental human rights, defined in Article 3 of the ECHR. It is emphasized that it wants to become Article 3 of the Convention, it does not define the living conditions in the related (fixed), its practical ECtHR with the formation of such standards. The main guideline of the ECtHR is the provision of human rights guaranteed by the Convention and the inevitability of the course of democracy in the member states of the ECHR. Using arterial attractiveness “beyond a reasonable doubt”, the ECtHR not only establishes a violation (if any) of Articles 3 of the ECHR, but it also cooperates with ECHR member states to remedy the situation. In considering this category of information, the Court finds it difficult for prisoners or detainees to prove a violation of Article 3 of the Convention and summarizing the relevant materials of the Council of Europe, the report of the Committee on the Prevention of Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. rules for the treatment of prisoners (adopted by the UN General Assembly), the UN Convention against Torture, the materials of the Committee of Ministers, the reports of the Ombudsman and the results of research by organizations that do not require doubt in defending democracy. The ECtHR does not take into account the approaches of national legal systems, is not supported by procedural barriers in the application of data determined by the formula of their assessments. When evaluating the indicators of the ECtHR, a free assessment is made, but it is based on indisputable agreed conclusions. At the same time, the right defined by the state 3 of the ECHR is inadvertently supported. A global approach is not allowed: after notifying the Government of a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR, the ECtHR requires the Government to provide convincing indicators of conditions of detention and decides on possible violations of human rights, guaranteed articles of convincing evidence, the ECtHR recognizes a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR.