| Abstract: | In this master thesis, we deal with the first paragraph of Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, namely the right to a fair trial. The mentioned paragraph provides that everyone has the right to debate their civil rights and obligations or any criminal charges against them in a fair and public manner and within a reasonable time, by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. The judgment must be pronounced in public, but the press and the public may be excluded from the trial, completely or partly, in the interest of morality, public order or national security, if this is required in a democratic society for the benefit of minors or the protection of private life of the parties, or even if according to the Court's opinion, due to special circumstances, the trial's publicity would damage the interests of justice. In the master thesis, beside the theory, we present explanations, positions and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights regarding violations of the mentioned paragraph. The most important acquisition from the Court's point of view is to solve the complaints of individuals through which the importance of human rights is maintained and expanded, and encourage or force the governments of individual countries to take measures to improve the functioning of domestic institutions. The approach of the Court of Justice is therefore a casuistic one and, as a rule, requires that all the circumstances of the concrete case and knowledge of the whole judiciary must be taken into account. From this point of view, we presented in more detail the recent judgments against Slovenia, namely Tence versus Slovenia and Aždajić versus Slovenia, and some other judgments both against Slovenia and against other countries. The right to a fair trial is one of the most commonly enforced violations by the complainants, while the majority of judgments concern the violation of this right. By signing the Convention, Slovenia allowed the decisions of the Slovenian courts, based on individual complaints, to be subject to the assessment of the ECHR. Procedural guarantees regarding civil litigation can be classified into two basic groups. In the first group, we find the individual's rights to the court, that is, to ensure that an individual can achieve that his or her rights will be decided by the court. In the second group, however, we have the rights of an individual in the process happening. Within this group, the right to a statement or the right to an adversarial procedure, the right to equal protection of rights, the right to appeal, and the right to a trial within a reasonable time are presented. The master thesis also shows how the right to a fair trial is ensured through the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, and some related novelties brought about by the amended CPA. The European Court of Human Rights only has jurisdiction to decide whether the State has violated the ECHR or one of its protocols and, in the event that the national law of a State Party allows only partial satisfaction, the ECHR may impose a just satisfaction on the injured party. States Parties, in most cases, take into account the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, but the means of enforcement differ among themselves, inter alia, because States enforce judgments of the Court in accordance with their national regulations. In the final part of the master's thesis, we explain what the judgment of the Court means for the injured party in Slovenia and the regulation in some foreign countries, which have an extraordinary legal remedy in their civil procedural laws in the case of the Court's judgment. |
|---|
