Publication: De Kononov a Vasiliauskas y el principio de legalidad penal a la luz del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos: o por qué acierta en su análisis el voto particular del juez Pinto de Albuquerque en el asunto Ilnseher c. Alemania
Loading...
Official URL
Full text at PDC
Publication Date
2021
Advisors (or tutors)
Editors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Editorial Jurídica Continental
Citations
Exportar
Abstract
Las siguientes líneas persiguen un objetivo muy concreto: poner en cuestión uno de los modos de aproximación a la garantía criminal que el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos ha llevado a cabo. La jurisprudencia del alto tribunal en su examen del principio de legalidad penal ha otorgado un peso importante al concepto normativo «previsibilidad». Tanto, que la conformidad o violación del Convenio se ha llegado a sustentar en esta categoría. Ahora bien, algunos de los requisitos que se subsumen en este concepto normativo distan de satisfacer el contenido garantista tradicionalmente atribuido al mismo. Una comparación de los asuntos Kononov c. Letonia y Vasiliauskas c. Lituania permite poner de manifiesto esta divergencia de razonamientos.
The following test pursues a very specific purpose: to question one of the approaches to the criminal guarantee that the European Court of Human Rights has carried out. The case law of the court in its examination of the principle of legality has given significant weight to the normative concept of "foreseeability". So much so that the conformity or violation of the Convention has been supported in this category. Unfortunately, some of the requirements that are subsumed in this normative concept are far from satisfying the guarantee content traditionally attributed to it. An examination of the cases Kononov v. Latvia and Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania makes it possible to highlight this divergence of reasoning.
The following test pursues a very specific purpose: to question one of the approaches to the criminal guarantee that the European Court of Human Rights has carried out. The case law of the court in its examination of the principle of legality has given significant weight to the normative concept of "foreseeability". So much so that the conformity or violation of the Convention has been supported in this category. Unfortunately, some of the requirements that are subsumed in this normative concept are far from satisfying the guarantee content traditionally attributed to it. An examination of the cases Kononov v. Latvia and Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania makes it possible to highlight this divergence of reasoning.