Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14365/2391
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBahceci, Baris-
dc.date.accessioned2023-06-16T14:40:33Z-
dc.date.available2023-06-16T14:40:33Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.isbn978-9934-18-530-4-
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.22364/iscflul.7.2.20-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14365/2391-
dc.description7th International Conference of the Faculty-of-Law-of-the-University-of-Latviaon Legal Science - Functions,Significance and Future in Legal Systems -- OCT 16-18, 2019 -- Riga, LATVIAen_US
dc.description.abstractSince the European Court of Human Rights (Court) has autonomously redefined the concept of penalty, it has extended its jurisdiction. However, unless they deprive of liberty, disciplinary sanctions are excluded from this autonomous definition. In this respect, this case law study depicts the Court's approach to disciplinary sanctions and particularly focuses on problems arising from the implementation. From a descriptive point of view, exceptional status for disciplinary sanctions depends on two factors: The first factor is the criteria that was developed by the Court to assess whether autonomous penalties contain a structural incompatibility. In order to prove this argument, the practices indicating the discrepancy between the criteria of the nature of offence and the nature of sanction will be examined. A critical analysis of this situation shows that if these criteria are used in their current form, the problem will persist, and therefore a reinterpretation is needed. The second factor is the definition of disciplinary sanction undertaken by the Court. The phrase special in this definition creates uncertainty in terms of scope, and has controversial results. Therefore, these two factors need to be reviewed in order to ensure that the Court's case law on disciplinary sanctions yields more objective and consistent results.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipUniv Lativa,Univ Lativa, Fac Lawen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherUniv Latvia Pressen_US
dc.relation.ispartofLegal Scıence: Functıons, Sıgnıfıcance And Future in Legal Systems Iıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectECtHR case lawen_US
dc.subjectconcept of penaltyen_US
dc.subjectdisciplinary sanctionen_US
dc.subjectcriminal offenceen_US
dc.subjectnature of offenceen_US
dc.subjectnature of sanctionen_US
dc.titleQUESTIONING THE PENAL CHARACTER OF DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS IN THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS' CASE LAWen_US
dc.typeConference Objecten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.22364/iscflul.7.2.20-
dc.departmentİzmir Ekonomi Üniversitesien_US
dc.authoridBahceci, Baris/0000-0001-9991-0378-
dc.authorwosidBahceci, Baris/AAK-2973-2021-
dc.identifier.startpage242en_US
dc.identifier.endpage249en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000562864800020en_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryKonferans Öğesi - Uluslararası - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/A-
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/A-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypeConference Object-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.languageiso639-1en-
crisitem.author.dept08.01. Law-
Appears in Collections:WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu / WoS Indexed Publications Collection
Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
2391.PDF4.54 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record



CORE Recommender

Page view(s)

42
checked on Sep 30, 2024

Download(s)

280
checked on Sep 30, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check




Altmetric


Items in GCRIS Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.