تقابل حق بر حریم خصوصی با ضرورت مبارزه با تروریسم در نظام حقوق بشر شورای اروپا؛ با تأکید بر بحران فعلی اروپا

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق بین الملل دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد نجف آباد

2 استادیار گروه حقوق، واحد تهران مرکز، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی

3 استادیار گروه حقوق دانشگاه اصفهان

چکیده

ضرورت مقابله با تروریسم بر کسی پوشیده نیست و همواره دولت­ها از حداکثر توان خود به‌منظور مبارزه با این پدیده استفاده می­کنند. اقدامات ضد تروریستی بر مبنای منافع عام جامعه انجام می­شود و در این راه، گاه حقوق بشر افراد دچار مداخله­ها و تعرض­هایی می‌شود. به‌عنوان مثال، به قصد مقابله و پیشگیری از حملات تروریستی حریم خصوصی شهروندان نقض می­شود. از آنجایی که قاره اروپا مدتی است دچار بحران مهاجرت بی­رویه و برخی اقدامات تروریستی شده است و در پی آن دولت­های این قاره ناچار به تحدید برخی حریم­های خصوصی شده­اند، این مقاله درصدد است تا براساس کنوانسیون اروپایی حقوق بشر و طبق رویه دیوان اروپایی حقوق بشر عملکرد این دولت­ها را بسنجد و به این سؤال پاسخ دهد که آیا می­توان به‌منظور مقابله با تروریسم از حقوق بنیادین بشری شهروندان گذشت. در نهایت، ملاحظه می­شود که به‌موجب کنوانسیون اروپایی حقوق بشر و بر مبنای تصمیمات دیوان اروپایی حقوق بشر در کنار رهنمون‌های شورای اروپا، تحت وضعیت‌های بسیار ویژه و خاص می­توان ضمن احترام هرچه تمام­تر به حق بر حریم خصوصی، از دایره این حق به‌صورت محدود و موقت و در تعقیب اهداف مهمی نظیر حفظ کلیت جامعه و در پی نیازهای مبرم اجتماعی کاست.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

The right to privacy versus the necessity to fight terrorism from the viewpoint of european human rights system; emphasizing the current crisis in Europe

چکیده [English]

Fight to terrorism is very necessary and states always use their power to fight this phenomenon. Anti-terroristic action are being taken under the society`s general benefits and in this way, the personal human rights is being intervened and violated some time. For instance, the citizens` privacy is being violated in order to fight and prevent the terroristic attacks.
As recently Europe is under the crisis of severe migration and some terroristic acts, and consequently the states inevitably restrict some aspects of right to privacy, this paper is seeking to evaluate the states` practice according to the European convention of human rights and in accordance with the European court of human rights` practice and respond whether it is possible to sacrifice the fundamental human rights to fighting terrorism.
Finally, according to the European convention of human rights and the European court of human rights` case law besides the guidelines of council of Europe, under special circumstances, we could respect the right to privacy and decrease this right`s scope limitedly and temporarily in order to pursue important purposes like maintaining the society as a whole or following the important social needs.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Right to privacy
  • Human Rights
  • Terrorism
  • Derogation
  • European Court of Human Rights
الف- فارسی
کتاب
- انصاری، باقر، (1390)، حقوق حریم خصوصی، تهران: سمت.
 
مقاله
- زمانی، سیدقاسم و حسینی‌آزاد، سیدعلی، (1393)، «تأملی در برخورد دیوان اروپایی حقوق بشر با ماده 9 کنوانسیون اروپایی حقوق بشر بر پایه هاتان لیلا شاهین»، دو فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق بشر اسلامی، شماره 6.
 
ب- انگلیسی
Books
- Greer, S, (1997), The Exceptions to Articles 8 to 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing, Human Rights Files No. 15.
 
- Harris, D. J, O’Boyle, M. and Warbrick. C, (1995), Law of the European Convention on Human Rights, London: Butterworths.
 
 - Korff,  Douwe, (2010), “Paper No. 4: The Legal, Framework”, in: Ian Brown & Douwe Korff, Privacy & Law Enforcement, Centre for Public Reform.
 
- Simpson, W. B, (2001), Human Rights and the End of Empire _ Britain and the Genesis of the European Convention, Oxford: Oxford, University Press.
 
Articles
-  Gross, (1998), “Once More into the Breach: The Systematic Failure of Applying the European Convention on Human Rights to Entrenched Emergencies”, Yale Journal of International Law, Volume 23.
 
- Hedigan, John, (2005), “The European Convention on Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism”, Fordham International Law Journal, Volume 28, Issue 2.
 
- M. E. Badar, (2003), “Basic Principles Governing Limitations on Individual Rights and Freedoms in Human Rights Instruments”, International Journal of Human Rights, Volume 7.
 
-  Frueh, Sara, (2009), “Preventing Terrorism, Protecting Privacy”, An Online Article Published by the National Academies in Focus, Winter 2009 Volume 8 Number 3.
 
- Warbrick, Collin, (2002), “The Principles of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Response of States to Terrorism”, European Human Rights Law Review, Volume 7.
 
- Warbrick, Colin, (2004), “The European Response to Terrorism in an Age of Human Rights”, The European Journal of International Law, Volume 15 number 5.
 
Official Instruments
- Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data, ETS No.
 
- Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 4 November 1950 (ECHR).
 
- High Commissioner for Human Rights, Human Rights, Terrorism and Counter-terrorism, Fact Sheet No. 32.
 
- Protocol 11 to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (1994).
 
- Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, OJ L 281, 23.11.1995.
 
- Directive 2002/58/EC replaced an Earlier Directive, Directive 97/66/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 4 November 1997 Concerning the Processing of Personal Data and the Protection of Privacy in the Telecommunications Sector.
 
- High Commissioner for Human Rights, Human Rights, Terrorism and Counter-terrorism, Fact Sheet No. 32.
 
 - The General Assembly’s Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, 1994, resolution 49/60.
- the UN Security Council, resolution 1566 (2004).
 
- European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism, Strasbourg, 15/05/2003.
 
- Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, Warsaw, 16/05/2005.
 
European Convention on the Compensation of Victims of Violent Crimes, Strasbourg, 24/11/1983.
 
- An official Interpretation of Article 8, Available at ECHR-online website.
 
- The National Academy of Sciences, Protecting individual privacy in the struggle against terrorists: a framework for program assessment, USA: the National Academies Press, 2008.
 
-           Report of a Commission to consider Legal Procedures to deal with Terrorist Activities in Northern Ireland 1972 (The Diplock Report) Cmnd. 5185.
 
-           Council of Europe Guidelines; Human rights and the fight against terrorism, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, 11 July 2002.
 
 - European Convention on Extradition, Strasbourg, 17/03/1978.
 
- Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 22 (48), 20 July 1993.
 
- Charter of fundamental rights of the European Union, 7 December 2000.
 
Case Law
-            Aksoy v. Turkey, [1997] 23 Eur. H.R. Rep. 553.
-          Aksoy v. Turkey, ECHR, (1996-VI) 2260.
-          Ferdinand Jozef COLON V. the Netherlands (Decision), Application no. 49458/06, ECtHR, 2012
-          Bodil Lindqvist v Åklagarkammaren i Jönköping, Opinion of Advocate-General Tizzano of 19 September 2002; Judgment of 6 November 2003.
-           Case of Amann v. Switzerland, App. No(s). 27798/95, ECtHR, 2000.
-          Case of Copland v. the UK, Application no. 62617/00 , ECtHR, 2007.
-          Case of Rotaru v. Romania, Application no. 28341/95, ECtHR, 2000.
     - Case of Brannigan & McBride v. United Kingdom, [1994] 17 Eur. H.R. Rep. 539.
-  Case of Brannigan v. the United Kingdom, ECHR, series A, No. 258-B.
-  Case of Brogan v. the United Kingdom, ECHR, 1988, Series A, No. 145-B.
- Case of Buckland v. the United Kingdom, (Application no. 40060/08), ECtHR, 2012.
 
- Case of Copland v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 62617/00 , ECtHR, 2007.
 
- Case of Gillow v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 9063/80, ECtHR, 1986.
 
-Case of Hatton and others v. the United Kingdom, Application no. 36022/97, ECtHR, 2003.
 
- Case of Hulki Gunes v Turkey, ECtHR, Application 28490/95.
 
- Case of Klass v. Germany, [1978] 28 Eur. Ct. H.R. (ser. A) 4, [1979-1980] 2 Eur. H.R. Rep. 214.
 
- Case of Silver v. United Kingdom, [1981] 3 Eur. H.R. Rep. 475.
 
- E.g. Brogan v. United Kingdom, ECHR, Series A, No. 145-B.
 
- Greek case, (1969) 12 YB ECHR 45.
 
- Kiliç v. Turkey, Appl. No. 22492/93, (Sect. 1) ECHR 2000-III.
 
- Klass and Others v. Germany, 6 September 1978, Series A no. 28.
 
- Lawless v Republic of Ireland (Appl 332/57); (1960-61) 1 ECtHR, Series B.56.
 
- Lawless v. Ireland (No 3), ECHR, Series A No. 3.
 
- Lawless v. Ireland, [1960] 1 Eur. H.R. Rep. 1.
 
- Lindqvist v. Sweden, Case No. C-101/01, the Court of Justice of the European Union, 6 November 2003.
 
- McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom, ECtHR, 27 September 1995.
- McCann v. United Kingdom, ECHR (1999), Series A, No. 324.
 
- Osman v. the United Kingdom judgment of 28 October 1998, Reports 1998-VIII.
 
- Österreichischer Rundfunk v. Austria, Case number: C-465/00, the Court of Justice of the European Union, 20 May 2003.
 
 
Official Website
 
 
- Draft comprehensive convention against international terrorism, the General Assembly, Article. 2.
 
 
 
 
 
 
-An official Interpretation of Article 8, Available at ECHR-online website as follow: http://www.coe.int/T/E/Legal_affairs/Legal_co-operation/Data_protection.
 
- http://echr-online.info/article-8-echr/ (last visited on: 12/09/2015).
 
- http://echr-online.info/article-8-echr/ (last visited on: 12/09/2015).
 
- https://euobserver.com/justice/130043 (last visit: 01/02/2016).
 
 
-          http://echr-online.info/article-8-echr/ (last visited on 15/09/2015).