Practice of the European Court of Human Rights in defining the range of permissible restrictions on the freedom to conduct a business

The subject of the article is the application of the concept of the range of permissible restrictions on rights and freedoms that not enshrined in the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the practice of the European Court of Human Rights.

The purpose of the research is to identify the basic position of the Court on the question of determining the degree of proportionate balance between public and private interests in establishing restrictions on the rights and freedoms of a person in the sphere of business activity.

The methodology. In the process of the research, both general scientific and special methods of knowing socio-legal phenomena (formal legal method, circular causality method) were used. The multivariance of achieving common standards for assessing the range of permissible restrictions on the freedom to conduct a business is determined by analyzing the balanced influence of internal and external factors, the interaction of many dichotomies and adichotomies.

Results, scope of application. The provisions of the Convention define the range of rights and freedoms protected. However, the Court in its practice broadly interprets the list of rights and freedoms protected by the Convention. The Court considers the Convention as a "living instrument" in order to adapt it to changing conditions of public life. The Court’s current practice does not imply that the Court has exceeded its powers. The court implements the idea of circular causality of legal phenomena, perceived including in European space. European tradition recognizes the possibility of changing the legal space in different ways. The main way of transforming the legal system is to change quantitative parameters. It is possible to accumulate the qualities of practical implementation of the principles enshrined in the Convention by ensuring the realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms. Investigators of the Court's practice mainly analyse the characteristics of the protection of human rights and freedoms explicitly mentioned in the Convention. The complexity of the study of the Court's practice for the protection of unrecognized human rights and freedoms stems from its heterogeneity. However, an analysis of the practice of protecting such rights and freedoms reveals the internal mechanisms of the Court to ensure the equilibrium of legal space. The article defines the basic position of the Court on the question of determining the degree of proportionate balance between public and private interests in establishing restrictions on the rights and freedoms of a person and a citizen not expressly enshrined in the Convention. The realization of economic rights and freedoms requires the greatest flexibility of the mechanism for the protection of rights and freedoms. Intensive economic development requires a rapid change in the legal space. The interpretation of human rights and freedoms has an impact on the level of protection of the economic rights and freedoms. The text of the Convention has been modified without adopting its new edition.

Conclusions. Law enforcers are particularly interested in analyzing the Court's practice in cases related indirectly to the protection of freedom to conduct a business. The Court determines the main vectors of interpretation of the freedom to conduct a business. Law enforcers can use the Court's approach in interpreting the provisions of the Convention without risking being accused of human rights and freedoms violations. The generalizations make it possible to establish the ideological and substantive component of the basic axiological imperative of the Court in the protection of the economic rights and freedoms through the protection of the right to property. It was concluded that the Court's decisions justified the need to protect the freedom to conduct a business by its inherent connection with the right to property, as well as the universality of the criteria for determining the legality of restricting the rights and freedoms.

1. Hirschl R. Comparative Matters: The Renaissance of Comparative Constitutional Law. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2014. 320 p.

2. Kruss V.I. Human rights restrictions and legal restrictions: problems of doctrinal distinction. Yuridicheskaya tekhnika = Legal technique, 2018, no. 12, pp. 205–213. (In Russ.).

3. Nikitina E.V. Limitation of constitutional human rights in legislations of subjects of the Russian Federation. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2015, no. 11 (27), pp. 35–48. (In Russ.).

4. Slobodchikova S.N. Free elections: the issue of permissible limitations of passive suffrage. Agrarnoe i zemel’noe pravo = Agrarian and land law, 2019, no. 6 (174), pp. 64–66. (In Russ.).

5. Yakimova E.M. Admissible restrictions of constitutional rights and freedoms of the person and citizen in the sphere of business activity. Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Seriya “Pravo” = Herald of Omsk University. Series “Law”, 2018, no. 2 (55), pp. 49–54. (In Russ.).

6. Janis M.W., Kay R.S., Bradley A.W. European Human Rights Law, Text and Materials. Oxford University Press, 2008. 957 p.

7. Sajo A. Self-restriction of power, Short course of constitutionalism. Moscow, Yurist Publ., 2001. 292 p. (In Russ.).

8. Kruss V.I. The theory of constitutional legal use. Moscow, Norma publ., 2007. 752 p. (In Russ.).

9. Sahakyan A.G. The Human right to liberty and security of person criminal proceedings in Russia: practice European Court of Human Rights on the application of article 5 European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Zakon i pravo = Law and Legislation, 2018, no. 7, pp. 97–99. (In Russ.).

10. Slobodchikova S.N. Realization of the rights of convicts in the Russian constitutional-legal model of free elections. Vserossiiskii kriminologicheskii zhurnal = Russian Journal of Criminology, 2019, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 932–940. (In Russ.).

11. Burmagin S.V. Problems of using the decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in the criminal trials by the courts of the Russian Federation. Vserossiiskii kriminologicheskii zhurnal = Russian Journal of Criminology, 2018, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 299–309 (In Russ.).

12. Prikhod'ko T.V. The judgments of the European Court of Human Rights as sources of standards of rights and freedoms of man and citizen in the Russian Federation. Zhurnal Sibirskogo federal’nogo universiteta. Seriya: Gumanitarnye nauki = Journal of Siberian Federal University. Humanities and Social Sciences, 2017, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 1101–1108.

13. Lobanova Y.V. The role of the European Court of Human Rights in ensuring freedom of economic activity. Vestnik ekonomicheskoi bezopasnosti, 2017, no. 3, pp. 46–51. (In Russ.).

14. Kravchenko D.V., Glushchenko A.A. Some “economic” decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in the context of constitutional economics. Pravo i ekonomika = Law and economics, 2014, no. 9, pp. 10–16. (In Russ.).

15. Wollenschläger F. Fundamental Rights Regimes in the European Union: Contouring Their Spheres, in: Nakanishi Y. (ed.) Contemporary Issues in Human Rights Law, Singapore, Springer Publ., 2018, pp. 23–49.

16. Kolosova N.M. Direct action of the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the restriction of constitutional rights and freedoms of man and citizen in the context of judicial practice. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2019, no. 8, pp. 36–47. (In Russ.).

17. Prikhodko T.V. The understanding of the human and freedoms limitations as rights intervention. Akademicheskii yuridicheskii zhurnal = Academic Legal Journal, 2019, no. 2 (76), pp. 13–18. (In Russ.).

18. Plokhova V.I. Terms of legitimate restrictions of human rights and freedoms in criminal sphere. Vserossiiskii kriminologicheskii zhurnal = Russian Journal of Criminology, 2014, no. 4, pp. 83–92 (In Russ.).

19. Podmarev A.A. Issues on restrictions of rights and freedoms man and citizen in the modern constitution. Vestnik Saratovskoi gosudarstvennoi yuridicheskoi akademii = Saratov State Law Academy Bulletin, 2014, no. 4 (99), pp. 141–145. (In Russ.).

20. Kerimov D.A. Methodology of law: subject, functions, problems of the philosophy of law. Moscow, MUH Publ., 2011. 520 p. (In Russ.).

21. Prikhodko T.V. The cases of human right’s and freedom’s limitation in Russia and Germany: comparative legal analysis. Sibirskii yuridicheskii zhurnal = Siberian Law Herald, 2012, no. 1, pp. 129–132. (In Russ.).

22. Epping V. Grundrechte. Hannover, Springer Publ., 2005. 486 p. (In German).

23. Krings G. Grund und Grenzen grundrechtlicher Schutzansprüche. Berlin, Steglitz, Duncker & Humblot Publ., 2003. 417 p. (In German).

24. Dietlein J. Die Kontrollbefugnis der Landesverfassungsgerichte – Überlegungen zu BVerfG, Beschl. Vom 15.10.1997 – 2 BvN 1/95. Jura, 2000, no. 1, pp. 19–34. (In German).

25. Bazhukov S.A. Relationship between the concepts «natural limits of human rights» and «human rights restriction» on the example of electoral rights. Yuridicheskie zapiski = Legal briefs, 2014, no. 2, pp. 63–69. (In Russ.).

26. Gojman V.I. Principles, limits, grounds for restricting human rights and freedoms under Russian law and international law. Gosudarstvo i pravo = State and Law, 1998, no. 7, pp. 20–43. (In Russ.).

27. Zhilina M.L. Constitutional restrictions on the political rights and freedoms of citizens of the Russian Federation, Cand. Diss. Yekaterinburg, 2005. 204 p. (In Russ.).

28. Pchelintsev S.V. On the concepts of "the limits of the exercise of the rights and freedoms of citizens" and "the limits of the restriction of the rights and freedoms of citizens": theoretical aspects. Rossiiskii sud'ya = Russian Judge, 2005, no. 4, pp. 21–25. (In Russ.).

29. Balthasar A. Grenzen und Gefahren des Schutzes der Grundrechte. Wien, 2009. 325 p. (In German).

30. Ebzeev B.S. Personality and state in Russia: mutual responsibility and constitutional obligations. Moscow, Norma Publ., 2008. 384 p. (In Russ.).

31. Kamyshansky V.P. Limits of freedom and restrictions of entrepreneurs rights in a competitive environment. Vlast' zakona = Power of Law, 2016, no. 3 (27), pp. 15–27. (In Russ.).

32. Barry J.M., Pollman E. Regulatory Entrepreneurship. Southern California Law Review, 2017, vol. 90, no. 3, pp. 383–448.

33. Kovler A.I. Constitutional Economics at the European Court of Human Rights, in: Avak’yan S.A., Barenboim P.D., Komarova V.V. (eds.) Ezhegodnik Konstitutsionnoi ekonomiki. 2018, Moscow, Lum Publ., 2018, pp. 148–167. (In Russ.).

34. De Salvia M. Precedents of the European Court of Human Rights. Guidelines on judicial practice relating to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Judicial practice from 1960 to 2002. St. Petersburg, Yuridicheskii tsentr Press Publ., 2004. 1072 p. (In Russ.).

35. Nussberger A. European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms – Constitution for Europe? Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie = International Justice, 2019, no. 2 (30), pp. 3–19. (In Russ.).

36. Kovalenko S.I. The evolutionary approach of the European Court of Human Rights to the interpretation of the norms of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: periodization. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie = International justice, 2018, no. 3 (27), pp. 77–92. (In Russ.).