SENTENCING STANDARDS UNDER THE CONVENTION FOR THE PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS

The article is devoted to the analysis of the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights on sentencing standards. The article entails conditions under which punishment, as the means of interference in human rights and freedoms, does not conform to the human rights standards, guaranteed by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. They include such conditions: (a) the Convention explicitly prohibits the enforcement of the certain punishment; (b) the punishment interferes with the right or freedom that is absolute and the Convention does not allow any exception to it; c) the punishment interferes with the right or freedom, which is not absolute, and does not conform to the legitimacy conditions of such interference. The articles of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms entail legitimacy requirements under which it is permitted to restrict the human rights by the means of criminal law. Those requirements are differentiated for each nonabsolute right. However, there are a number of standard requirements that pertain to the restriction of all non-absolute human rights through the imposition of punishment. After the analysis of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the author concludes that these sentencing standarts are derived from the guarantees set forth in Articles 7, 14 of the Convention, Article 4 of the Protocol No. 7 to the Convention and the general requirement of the proportionality of the imposed punishment. It is noted that the European Court of Human Rights does not interfere in the national court's decision on the particular type punishment that should be imposed, except for cases where the issue of compliance with the standard of proportionality of that punishment is raised.