National and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights and freedoms in contemporary conditions

Subject of the research. The article considers two levels in the mechanism of protection of human rights and freedoms: national and supranational. National includes both judicial and non-judicial methods of protection. The supranational level is represented by universal (global) and regional ways. The purpose of the research is to identify an effective mechanism for the protection of human rights that can replace the mechanism of protection provided by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 1950, which has ceased to be valid for citizens of the Russian Federation. Research methods are the formal-legal method, analysis, synthesis, formallogical method.

The main results. Theoretically, a particular citizen can use any of the national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights. However, the nature of their action and the procedure for gaining access to these mechanisms are different, which affects their effectiveness and the readiness of a person to turn to one or another method of protection. Among supranational mechanisms, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 has a unique status: on the one hand, this document is “a symbol of the moral consensus of all states, the starting point for the creation of a modern human rights regime”; on the other hand, it is an act-declaration, the application of which in specific legal relations and the protection of human rights with its help are problematic. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 12/16/1966 provides for the establishment of a Human Rights Committee that exercises control over the provisions of the Covenant through a system of reports. Reports on measures taken to implement the rights provided for by the Covenant, as well as on non-fulfillment of their obligations under the Covenant by other States Parties, are submitted by States Parties. The mechanism of reports, however, is not reliable enough - there are states that ignore it.

Regional Conventions are rightly considered the most effective means of protecting human rights. The implementation of the provisions of the Conventions is ensured by the activities of supranational judicial bodies, to which the applicant can file a complaint. The conditions for applying to such a court, its territorial proximity, the possibility of executing court decisions make this method of protection as accessible as possible. Among the national remedies, first of all, it should be noted the activity of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation to protect the constitutional rights of citizens. The provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and the Constitution of the Russian Federation in the section on human rights are almost identical, often written in the same phrases. But, despite the number of coincidences in the designation of human rights and freedoms, the main thing is not the designation (this is a declaration) of a specific right or freedom, but how they are applied and what is the practice of their protection (interpretation) by the Constitutional Court at the national level and the Convention on the supranational. It is here that the understanding of “identical” formulations can differ, and the question of who is better: a national or supranational body protects a particular human right, becomes debatable. It should also be remembered about the very meaning of supranational protection as an opportunity to receive protection from one's own state, albeit a subsidiary one. Therefore, it would be wrong to assume that in the absence of the possibility of applying to the ECHR, a citizen will be able to receive protection in the Constitutional Court without prejudice to the outcome of such protection.

Considering that the protection of human rights is, first of all, the activity of national courts of first instance, consideration by the courts of administrative, civil and criminal cases, in cases where it is carried out in full compliance with the norms of procedural legislation, is able to fully ensure the protection of the rights and human freedoms. To do this, the courts have all the necessary tools, you just need the ability and desire to use them.

Among the internal structures for monitoring the observance of human rights, a number of state and public bodies can be distinguished - the Commissioner for Human Rights in the Russian Federation, the Council under the President of the Russian Federation for the Development of Civil Society and Human Rights, the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation, the police, the prosecutor's office and others. However, it is not possible to attribute them to the effective bodies for the protection of human rights.

Conclusions. The existing national and supranational mechanisms for the protection of human rights, in their effectiveness, are not able to fully compensate for the loss of the opportunity for citizens of the Russian Federation to file a complaint with the European Court of Human Rights.

1. Dixon M. Textbook on International Law, 6th ed. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2007. 372 p.

2. Anisimov V.F., Truntsevsky Yu.V. The invasion of international law into the national legal system. Pravoprimenenie = Law Enforcement Review, 2021, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 40–57. DOI: 10.52468/2542-1514.2021.5(1).40-57. (In Russ.).

3. Kovler A.I. "Moral sovereignty" in the face of "state sovereignty" in the European system of human rights protection. Mezhdunarodnoe pravosudie = International Justice, 2019, no. 3, pp. 52–63. (In Russ.).

4. Pevtsova N.S. Physical aspects of human existence in domestic constitutional construction. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal’noe pravo = Constitutional and municipal law, 2021, no. 12, pp. 51–57. (In Russ.).

5. Spano R. What is the role of human duty, duties and obligations in our European discourse on human rights? Byulleten’ Evropeiskogo Suda po pravam cheloveka. Rossiiskoe izdanie = Bulletin of the European Court of Human Rights. Russian edition, 2022, no. 1, pp. 148–153. (In Russ.).

6. Ispolinov A.S. Legal status of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (to the 70th anniversary of adoption). Sravnitel’noe konstitutsionnoe obozrenie = Comparative constitutional review, 2018, no. 4, pp. 100–107. (In Russ.).

7. Hoover J. Rereading the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: plurality and contestation, not consensus. Journal of Human Rights, 2013, vol. 12, no 2, pp. 217–241.

8. Kovler A.I. European Convention in the international system for the protection of human rights, Monograph. Moscow, Norma Publ., 2019. 304 p. (In Russ.).

9. Uvarov A.A. Questions of the application of international law on human rights in Russia. Konstitutsionnoe i munitsipal’noe pravo = Constitutional and municipal law, 2021, no. 10, pp. 3–6. (In Russ.).

10. Panova E.V. The role of treaty bodies in the promotion and protection of human rights (on the example of the Human Rights Committee). Yurist-mezhdunarodnik = International Lawyer, 2005, no. 2, pp. 49–54. (In Russ.).

11. Bezborodov Yu.S. On patchwork integration of African states. Publichnoe i chastnoe mezhdunarodnoe pravo = Public and private international law, 2020, no. 4, pp. 3–6. (In Russ.).

12. Kiseleva O.A. Theoretical and applied aspects of interaction between the international and national legal systems. Pravoprimenenie = Law Enforcement Review, 2022, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 50–62. DOI: 10.52468/2542-1514.2022.6(1).50-62. (In Russ.).

13. Lyubchenko M.Ya. Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights as "soft law" (soft law). Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa = Herald of civil procedure, 2017, no. 3, pp. 256–270. (In Russ.).

14. Lipkina N.N. Interpretation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms by the European Court of Human Rights and the Rule of Law. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava = Journal of Russian Law, 2015, no. 4, pp. 130–142. (In Russ.).

15. Kovler A.I. Evolutionary Interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights: Possibilities and Limits. European Court of Human Rights as a Subject of Interpretation of Law. Zhurnal zarubezhnogo zakonodatel'stva i sravnitelnogo pravovedeniya = Journal of Foreign Legislation and Comparative Law, 2016, no. 3, pp. 92–100. (In Russ.).

16. Galperin M.L. Amendments to the Constitution and issues of interpretation in national and international justice. Aktual’nye problemy rossiiskogo prava = Actual problems of Russian law, 2020, no. 12, pp. 181–189. (In Russ.).

17. Sultanov A.R. 25 years in the Council of Europe and again the discussion about the binding nature of the ECHR judgments. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa = Herald of civil procedure, 2021, no. 6, pp. 154–178. (In Russ.).

18. Zhuykov V.M. Russian Legislation and International Law: Problems of Interaction Based on the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Zakon = Law, 2020, no. 3, pp. 115–125. (In Russ.).

19. Likhachev M.A. International and domestic law: is there a first among equals? Rossiiskii yuridicheskiizhurnal = Russian legal journal, 2020, no. 3, pp. 30–44. (In Russ.).

20. Bonner A.T. Preface to the textbook on administrative proceedings, or a brief history of Russian administrative justice. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa = Herald of civil procedure, 2019, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 201–230. (In Russ.).

21. Grechkina O.V. The development of scientific ideas should be based on the modernization of modern administrative procedural legislation. Administrativnoe pravo i protsess = Administrative law and procedure, 2018, no. 9, pp. 7–10. (In Russ.).

22. Gromoshina N.A. On the principle of activity of the court in administrative proceedings. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa = Herald of civil procedure, 2019, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 96–112. (In Russ.).

23. Grubtsova S.P. Legal presumptions in judicial administrative procedural law, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Yekaterinburg, 2018. 30 p. (In Russ.).

24. Novikov A.V. Administrative procedural form: scientific and legal realities. Administrativnoe pravo i protsess = Administrative law and procedure, 2015, no. 11, pp. 70–80. (In Russ.).

25. Starilov Yu.N. Administrative legal proceedings and administrative procedures: towards systemic interaction and an appropriate level of legal regulation. Administrativnoe pravo i protsess = Administrative law and procedure, 2018, no. 3, pp. 7–23. (In Russ.).

26. Shchepalov S.V. On the discretion of the court within the framework of the administrative procedural form. Rossiiskaya yustitsia = Russian justice, 2015, no. 6, pp. 42–46. (In Russ.).

27. Terekhova L.A. Drift of administrative proceedings. Vestnik grazhdanskogo protsessa = Herald of civil procedure, 2020, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 30–50. (In Russ.).

28. Zhuykov V.M. On some problems of the principle of independence of judges. Zakon = Law, 2019, no. 10, pp. 122–136. (In Russ.).

29. Sultanov A.R. Decisions of the European Court of Human Rights in the civil process of the Russian Federation, Cand. Diss. Thesis. Kazan, 2022. 34 p. (In Russ.).

30. Nikitina E.E. The system of human rights and freedoms in the context of the technological revolution. Zhurnal rossiiskogo prava = Journal of Russian law, 2020, no. 8, pp. 27–44. (In Russ.).