<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Publishing DTD v1.3 20210610//EN" "JATS-journalpublishing1-3.dtd">
<article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="1.3" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xml:lang="ru"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">aprp</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="ru">Актуальные проблемы российского права</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Actual Problems of Russian Law</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="ppub">1994-1471</issn><issn pub-type="epub">2782-1862</issn><publisher><publisher-name>MSAL</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id custom-type="elpub" pub-id-type="custom">aprp-1094</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Research Article</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЕ ПРАВО</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="section-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>INTERNATIONAL LAW</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Независимость и беспристрастность суда по смыслу статьи 6 Европейской конвенции о защите прав человека и основных свобод</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="en"><trans-title>Independence and Impartiality of the Court Within the Meaning of Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes"><name-alternatives><name name-style="eastern" xml:lang="ru"><surname>Шадарова</surname><given-names>А. Н.</given-names></name><name name-style="western" xml:lang="en"><surname>Shadarova</surname><given-names>A. N.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><email xlink:type="simple">shadarova@hotmail.com</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff-1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff-1"><aff xml:lang="ru"><institution>Московский государственный юридический университет имени О.Е. Кутафина (МГЮА)</institution></aff><aff xml:lang="en"><institution>Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL)</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date pub-type="collection"><year>2016</year></pub-date><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>01</day><month>07</month><year>2016</year></pub-date><volume>0</volume><issue>7</issue><fpage>160</fpage><lpage>165</lpage><permissions><copyright-statement>Copyright &amp;#x00A9; Шадарова А.Н., 2016</copyright-statement><copyright-year>2016</copyright-year><copyright-holder xml:lang="ru">Шадарова А.Н.</copyright-holder><copyright-holder xml:lang="en">Shadarova A.N.</copyright-holder><license xml:lang="ru" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.</license-p></license><license xml:lang="en" license-type="creative-commons-attribution" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/" xlink:type="simple"><license-p>This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.</license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://aprp.msal.ru/jour/article/view/1094">https://aprp.msal.ru/jour/article/view/1094</self-uri><abstract><p>Статья содержит краткий обзор ключевых тестов и критериев, которыми руководствуется Европейский Cуд по правам человека при рассмотрении и оценке жалоб заявителей о нарушении права на независимый и беспристрастный суд, которые входят в концепцию справедливого судебного разбирательства. Проанализированы понятия «независимый суд» и «беспристрастный суд». Несмотря на то что зачастую эти два понятия рассматриваются Европейским Судом как тесно взаимосвязанные, в практике Суда сформулированы различные тесты для оценки каждого из них.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="en"><p>The paper presents a brief review of key tests and criteria applied by the European Court of Human Rights when considering and evaluating applicant's complains regarding Member States of the European Convection for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms violations of the right to independent and impartial courts that also enshrines the concept of "fair trial”. First, the author examines the concept of "independent court” and then the concept of an "impartial court". Despite the fact that these two concepts are often dealt with by the European Court as closely interrelated, the Court practice has developed different tests to evaluate each of them.</p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>Европейская конвенция</kwd><kwd>Европейский Суд</kwd><kwd>справедливое судебное разбирательство</kwd><kwd>независимость суда</kwd><kwd>беспристрастность суда</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>European Convention</kwd><kwd>European Court of Human Rights</kwd><kwd>fair trial</kwd><kwd>independence of the Court</kwd><kwd>impartiality of the Court</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="cit1"><label>1</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Findlay v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 22107/93, § 73, Judgment of 25 February 1997</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Findlay v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 22107/93, § 73, Judgment of 25 February 1997</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit2"><label>2</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Bochan v. Ukraine, Application No. 7577/02, § 68, Judgment of 3 May 2007</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Bochan v. Ukraine, Application No. 7577/02, § 68, Judgment of 3 May 2007</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit3"><label>3</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Parlov-Tkalcic v. Croatia, Application No. 24810/06, § 86, Judgment of 22 December 2009</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Parlov-Tkalcic v. Croatia, Application No. 24810/06, § 86, Judgment of 22 December 2009</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit4"><label>4</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Sutyagin v. Russia, Application No. 30024/02, § 183, Judgment of 3 May 2011</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Sutyagin v. Russia, Application No. 30024/02, § 183, Judgment of 3 May 2011</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit5"><label>5</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Campbell and Fell v. United Kingdom. Application Nos. 7819/77, 7878/77, § 78, Judgment of 28 June 1984</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Campbell and Fell v. United Kingdom. Application Nos. 7819/77, 7878/77, § 78, Judgment of 28 June 1984</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit6"><label>6</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Рекомендация Комитета министров Совета Европы (2010) 12Е государствам - членам о судьях: независимость, эффективность и ответственность // URL: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1707137</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Рекомендация Комитета министров Совета Европы (2010) 12Е государствам - членам о судьях: независимость, эффективность и ответственность // URL: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1707137</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit7"><label>7</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">заключение № 1 Консультативного совета европейских судей «О стандартах независимости судебных органов и несменяемости судей» // URL: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1050737&amp;Site=COE</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">заключение № 1 Консультативного совета европейских судей «О стандартах независимости судебных органов и несменяемости судей» // URL: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1050737&amp;Site=COE</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit8"><label>8</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">заключение № 3 Консультативного совета европейских судей «О принципах и правилах, регулирующих профессиональное поведение судей» // URL: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1050737&amp;Site=COE</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">заключение № 3 Консультативного совета европейских судей «О принципах и правилах, регулирующих профессиональное поведение судей» // URL: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1050737&amp;Site=COE</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit9"><label>9</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">JP Enhancing Judicial Reform in the Eastern Partnership Countries "Independent Judicial Systems" Project Report // URL: http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/capacitybuilding/source/judic_reform/ENG%20 March%20Report%20Independant%20Judicial%20Systems.pdf</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">JP Enhancing Judicial Reform in the Eastern Partnership Countries "Independent Judicial Systems" Project Report // URL: http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/cooperation/capacitybuilding/source/judic_reform/ENG%20 March%20Report%20Independant%20Judicial%20Systems.pdf</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit10"><label>10</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Великая хартия судей (Фундаментальные принципы) // URL: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1707925</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Великая хартия судей (Фундаментальные принципы) // URL: https://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=1707925</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit11"><label>11</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR ibrahim Gürkan v. Turkey, Application No. 10987/10, § 19, Judgment of 13 October 2013.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR ibrahim Gürkan v. Turkey, Application No. 10987/10, § 19, Judgment of 13 October 2013.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit12"><label>12</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Khrykin v. Russia, Application No. 33186/08, §§ 27-39, Judgment of 19 April 2011; Batyrlova v. Russia, Application No. 31188/08, §§ 27-40, Judgment of 19 апреля 2011.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Khrykin v. Russia, Application No. 33186/08, §§ 27-39, Judgment of 19 April 2011; Batyrlova v. Russia, Application No. 31188/08, §§ 27-40, Judgment of 19 апреля 2011.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit13"><label>13</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Moiseyev v. Russia, Application No. 62936/00, §§ 167-185, Judgment of 9 October 2008.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Moiseyev v. Russia, Application No. 62936/00, §§ 167-185, Judgment of 9 October 2008.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit14"><label>14</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR.Sutyagin v. Russia, Application No. 30024/02, §§ 178-193, Judgment of 3 May 2011.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR.Sutyagin v. Russia, Application No. 30024/02, §§ 178-193, Judgment of 3 May 2011.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit15"><label>15</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Findlay v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 22107/93, § 73, Judgment of 25 February 1997</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Findlay v. the United Kingdom, Application No. 22107/93, § 73, Judgment of 25 February 1997</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit16"><label>16</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Parlov-Tkalcic v. Croatia, Application No. 24810/06, § 79, Judgment of 22 December 2009.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Parlov-Tkalcic v. Croatia, Application No. 24810/06, § 79, Judgment of 22 December 2009.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit17"><label>17</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Lavents v. Latvia, Application No. 58442/00, § 118-120, Judgment of 28 November 2002.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Lavents v. Latvia, Application No. 58442/00, § 118-120, Judgment of 28 November 2002.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit18"><label>18</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Tierce and Others v. San Marino, Application Nos. 24954/94, 24971/94 и 24972/94, § 76, Judgment of 27 July 2000</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Tierce and Others v. San Marino, Application Nos. 24954/94, 24971/94 и 24972/94, § 76, Judgment of 27 July 2000</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit19"><label>19</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Indra v. Slovakia, Application No. 46845/99, § 49, Judgment of 3 May 2005</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Indra v. Slovakia, Application No. 46845/99, § 49, Judgment of 3 May 2005</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit20"><label>20</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">Salov v. Ukraine, Application No. 65518/01, § 81, Judgment of 6 September 2005</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">Salov v. Ukraine, Application No. 65518/01, § 81, Judgment of 6 September 2005</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit21"><label>21</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Ozerov v. Russia, Application No. 64962/01, Judgment of 18 May 2010, Krivoshapkin v. Russia, Application No. 42224/02, Judgment of 27 January 2011</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Ozerov v. Russia, Application No. 64962/01, Judgment of 18 May 2010, Krivoshapkin v. Russia, Application No. 42224/02, Judgment of 27 January 2011</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit22"><label>22</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Daktaras v. Lithuania, Application No. 42095/98, § 35-36, Judgment of 10 October 2000</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Daktaras v. Lithuania, Application No. 42095/98, § 35-36, Judgment of 10 October 2000</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit23"><label>23</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Igor Kabanov v. Russia, Application No. 8921/05, Judgment of 3 February 2011, § 42-43.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Igor Kabanov v. Russia, Application No. 8921/05, Judgment of 3 February 2011, § 42-43.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit24"><label>24</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, Application No. 77562/01, § 63-66, Judgment of 29 июля 2004.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. San Leonard Band Club v. Malta, Application No. 77562/01, § 63-66, Judgment of 29 июля 2004.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit25"><label>25</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Ferrantelli and Santangelo v. Italy, № 19874/92, § 59-60, 7 августа 1996.</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Ferrantelli and Santangelo v. Italy, № 19874/92, § 59-60, 7 августа 1996.</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref><ref id="cit26"><label>26</label><citation-alternatives><mixed-citation xml:lang="ru">ECtHR. Kyprianou v. Cyprus [GC], Application No. 73797/01, Judgment of 15 December 2005, § 124-128, 133</mixed-citation><mixed-citation xml:lang="en">ECtHR. Kyprianou v. Cyprus [GC], Application No. 73797/01, Judgment of 15 December 2005, § 124-128, 133</mixed-citation></citation-alternatives></ref></ref-list><fn-group><fn fn-type="conflict"><p>The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.</p></fn></fn-group></back></article>
