Global Challenges in the Arctic Region: Sovereignty, Environment and Geopolitical Balance by Elena Conde & Sara Iglesias Sanchez

Author:Elena Conde & Sara Iglesias Sanchez [Conde, Elena & Sanchez, Sara Iglesias]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781472463258
Google: WsMEswEACAAJ
Goodreads: 29526712
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 2016-08-08T00:00:00+00:00

26 See Matthias Ahren, “The Provisions on Lands, Territories and Natural Resources in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and Introduction,” in Making the Declaration Work: The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, edited by Claire Charters and Rodolfo Stavenhagen (Copenhagen: Eks-Skolens Trykkeri, 2009), 212.

27 For this discussion, see Otis and Laurent, “Indigenous Land Claims in Europe.”

28 Decision of October 3, 1983, applications no 9278/81 and 9415/81.

29 See on this discussion Timo Koivurova, “Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Regarding Indigenous Peoples,” 11.

30 Ibid.

31 Halvar From v. Sweden, EComHR (1998), application no 34776/97.

32 EComHR (November 25, 1996), application no 27033/95.

33 Decision as to the admissibility ECtHR February 17, 2009, application no 39013/04.

34 Ibid., Paragraph 51.

35 Ibid., Paragraph 55. The decision found Article 1 of Protocol 1 not to be applicable, and the complaint was therefore rejected as being outside the scope ratione materiae of the Convention.

36 Otis and Laurent, “Indigenous Land Claims in Europe,” 177.

37 The claims based on the principle of equality of arms and the burden of proof were declared manifestly ill founded. The claim related to the effective access to court in relation to legal costs was rejected on the merits but the Court found a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 of the Convention in regard to the length of the proceedings in its judgment of March 30, 2010. The complex nature of the cases regarding indigenous claims based on immemorial usage had played a negative role in previous cases when it came to establishing the unreasonable length of procedures. See the decision of the European Commission of Human Rights of January 8, 1993 in O.B. and others against Norway, application no 15997/90.

38 Paragraph 5 of the partly dissenting opinion of Judge Ziemele.

39 Article 6, paragraph 1, Treaty on European Union (TEU).

40 Article 6, paragraph 3, TEU.

41 The scope of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU is established in its Article 51, paragraph 1

the provisions of this Charter are addressed to the institutions, bodies, offices and agencies of the Union with due regard for the principle of subsidiarity and to the Member States only when they are implementing Union law. They shall therefore respect the rights, observe the principles and promote the application thereof in accordance with their respective powers and respecting the limits of the powers of the Union as conferred on it in the Treaties.

42 According to Article 230 of the Treaty on the European Community, private parties not being addressed by the act in question could only challenge it if they were be directly and individually concerned. The CJEU interpreted that

[p]ersons other than those to whom a decision is addressed may only claim to be individually concerned if that decision affects them by reason of certain attributes which are peculiar to them or by reason of circumstances in which they are differentiated from all other persons and by virtue of these factors distinguishes them individually just as in the case of the person

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.