| Abstract [eng] |
Article 8 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights is devoted for the protection and respect of family and private life. Talking about family life, it is important to say that the definition of it have evolved for years creating more and more legal issues. The Court has considered the family to include husband and wife and children who are dependent on them, including illegitimate and adopted children. It seems that de facto family ties can arise where parties are living together outside marriage and children born out of such relationships form part of the family unit from the moment of birth and by the very fact of it. The family ties exist even where the parents are not living together at the time of the child's birth. In some circumstances, relations with grandparents may be protected under Article 8. More remote relationships are generally not close enough to consti¬tute family relationships protected by Article 8. There is, however, some slender evidence to suggest that a broader view is being taken of what constitutes the family. Engagement does not in itself constitute family life, but the relationship between a prisoner and his fiancee falls within private life. The same is true of transsexuals couples. Implementing one of those rights, arise a violation of other rights, embodied in the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights. The conflict usually is between articles 8 and 10. The freedom of expression is called as the essential foundations of democratic society. The media has a „public watch dog“ function, as it mentioned in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. Media has a task to import not only information which is favourably received or regarded as inoffensive, but also offend, chocked or disturbed information. Society has a right to obtain information about political matters or about matters of public interest. This freedom includes two components: freedom to receive information and freedom to impart them. These rights must be used in a such way that they do not constitute the violation of private life. Under the Convention, right to respect family or private life embodied in the article 8 and freedom of expression embodied in the Article 10 are not absolute. They state some restrictions and limitations. The interference is legitimate when it is necessary in a democratic society, interest of national security, prevention or disorder of crime and other. This is so called negative obligations. The problems of the protection of human rights can arise when the state fails to take such the obligations, for instance to enact some particular law – so called positive obligations. Thus it could the violation not only when the state fails to take positive obligations, but also when such the law trespasses the limit of the proportionality taking negative obligations. The problems about private life are coming out of its changing concept in XXI century. New technologies have vested the society with new instruments and made individuals’ lives more convenient. Evolution of technologies and social life enhanced individuals to access to information and knowledge; thus it inevitably may lead to a situation when members of society recognize the right to know, right to communicate, right to express views and contribute to the society as a more vital and valuable than traditional and straightforward “right to be left alone”. Legally speaking, of all the European human rights in the international catalogue, privacy is perhaps the most difficult to define and circumscribe. Nowadays, a person has less control on his personal information, because private life and privacy has become less important as to receive information and freedom to impart it. What’s why Europe and all the world confronts with big problems of violation of human rights in context of the protection of personal data The solution of these problems could be self regulation and legislation of various legal acts. |
