FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
Syllabus
EN
IT
Prerequisites
Knowledge of public law and international law.
Program
The course programme is divided into 7 inter-related parts as follows:
1) Theoretical issues in fundamental rights discourse. Universalism and particularism in the concept of fundamental rights.
2) Fundamental rights in the European tradition: Constitutional Settings. The problem of balancing fundamental rights. The Emergence of the notion of human dignity.
3) Fundamental rights in the American tradition: Due process, equal protection. From Roe v. Wade to Dobbs
4) Fundamental rights in the digital ecosystem
5) The international protection of human rights
a) The UN system
b) International criminal justice
c) The regional systems
6) Fundamental rights of same-sex couples in a comparative perspective (Guest Professor, Professor Miguel Arjona Sanchez, Univ. of Granada)
7) The European supranational scenario
a) The ECHR system
b) EU’s protection of fundamental rights
1) Theoretical issues in fundamental rights discourse. Universalism and particularism in the concept of fundamental rights.
2) Fundamental rights in the European tradition: Constitutional Settings. The problem of balancing fundamental rights. The Emergence of the notion of human dignity.
3) Fundamental rights in the American tradition: Due process, equal protection. From Roe v. Wade to Dobbs
4) Fundamental rights in the digital ecosystem
5) The international protection of human rights
a) The UN system
b) International criminal justice
c) The regional systems
6) Fundamental rights of same-sex couples in a comparative perspective (Guest Professor, Professor Miguel Arjona Sanchez, Univ. of Granada)
7) The European supranational scenario
a) The ECHR system
b) EU’s protection of fundamental rights
Books
Attending students:
Reading material distributed by the lecturers
Non attending students (below 80% attendance): as follows:
READING MATERIALS FOR ORAL EXAM OF NON-ATTENDING STUDENTS
A) Fundamental Rights in European Constitutions:
In order to study this section, student has to refresh his/her knowledge on post WW2 European constitutionalism. A useful tool is A. Buratti, Western Constitutionalism, Springer, 3rd edition, with special attention to Chapter 6 and 7: (i) fundamental rights issues and (ii) constitututional review, both in national constitutions as well as in European Constitutional Space.
Compulsory Readings:
- C. McCrudden, Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights, http://ejil.org/pdfs/19/4/1658.pdf
- Judgement by the Italian Constitutional Court on voluntary prostitution: https://www.cortecostituzionale.it/documenti/download/doc/recent_judgments/Sentenza_n_141_del_2019_eng_red_Modugno.pdf
- Judgement by the German Constitutional Tribunal on assisted suicide: https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/EN/2020/02/rs20200226_2bvr234715en.html;jsessionid=8FB596950A43ECC953B1C83AED3A0123.1_cid507
B) International Criminal Justice:
In order to study this section, it is necessary to own a good knowledge on (i) origins, (ii) jurisdiction, and (iii) competences of the International Criminal Court of the Hague. Students can visit the ICC’s website to obtain such information.
Compulsory readings:
- Tomushat, The Legacy of Nuremberg
- Jessberger – Geneuss, The Many Faces of the International Criminal Court
C) European Convention on Human Rights
In order to study this section, student finds introductory explanation on the ECHR in A. Buratti, Western Constitutionalism, Springer, Chapter 7.
Compulsory readings:
- Lautsi II (Grand Chamber) case: find it at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-104040
Reading material distributed by the lecturers
Non attending students (below 80% attendance): as follows:
READING MATERIALS FOR ORAL EXAM OF NON-ATTENDING STUDENTS
A) Fundamental Rights in European Constitutions:
In order to study this section, student has to refresh his/her knowledge on post WW2 European constitutionalism. A useful tool is A. Buratti, Western Constitutionalism, Springer, 3rd edition, with special attention to Chapter 6 and 7: (i) fundamental rights issues and (ii) constitututional review, both in national constitutions as well as in European Constitutional Space.
Compulsory Readings:
- C. McCrudden, Human Dignity and Judicial Interpretation of Human Rights, http://ejil.org/pdfs/19/4/1658.pdf
- Judgement by the Italian Constitutional Court on voluntary prostitution: https://www.cortecostituzionale.it/documenti/download/doc/recent_judgments/Sentenza_n_141_del_2019_eng_red_Modugno.pdf
- Judgement by the German Constitutional Tribunal on assisted suicide: https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/EN/2020/02/rs20200226_2bvr234715en.html;jsessionid=8FB596950A43ECC953B1C83AED3A0123.1_cid507
B) International Criminal Justice:
In order to study this section, it is necessary to own a good knowledge on (i) origins, (ii) jurisdiction, and (iii) competences of the International Criminal Court of the Hague. Students can visit the ICC’s website to obtain such information.
Compulsory readings:
- Tomushat, The Legacy of Nuremberg
- Jessberger – Geneuss, The Many Faces of the International Criminal Court
C) European Convention on Human Rights
In order to study this section, student finds introductory explanation on the ECHR in A. Buratti, Western Constitutionalism, Springer, Chapter 7.
Compulsory readings:
- Lautsi II (Grand Chamber) case: find it at https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-104040
Teaching methods
The course combines different teaching methods: lectures; seminars; student presentations. The lectures will provide the students with the necessary information and reading guidelines on the phenomena under study, while seminars will see students critically engage with this knowledge and encourage/participate in class debates. Students are expected to attend each class, to come to class prepared and to participate in discussions.
Students will agree the topic of their presentations with the lecturers and give assessed Power-point presentations in which they will critically evaluate the content and argument of a chosen topic and introduce related questions for the class discussion.
Students will agree the topic of their presentations with the lecturers and give assessed Power-point presentations in which they will critically evaluate the content and argument of a chosen topic and introduce related questions for the class discussion.
Exam Rules
Course assessment
The (default )verification of learning takes place exclusively through a final examination which consists of an individual or group presentation as discussed below. The objective of the final examination is to verify the achievement of the course learning outcome. In particular, the examination assesses the student's overall preparation, ability to integrate knowledge of the different parts of the programme, consequentiality of reasoning, analytical ability and autonomy of judgement. In addition, ownership of language and clarity of exposition are assessed, in adherence with the Dublin descriptors.
Minimum score for passing the written test 18 out of 30.
After listening to the presentations, the lecturers communicate the results to the students registered for the examination via the Delphi system.
Students may take the examination on all available dates. there is no roll-call jump.
The examination will be assessed according to the following criteria:
• FAIL: important deficiencies and/or inaccuracies in the knowledge and understanding of the topics; limited ability to analyse and synthesise, frequent generalisations and limited critical and judgemental skills, the topics are set out inconsistently and with inappropriate language;
• 18-20: Barely sufficient knowledge and understanding of the topics with possible generalisations and imperfections; sufficient capacity for analysis, synthesis and autonomy of judgement, the topics are frequently exposed in an incoherent manner and with inappropriate/technical language;
• 21-23: Routine knowledge and understanding of topics; ability to analyse and synthesise correctly with sufficiently coherent logical argumentation and appropriate/technical language
• 24-26: Fair knowledge and understanding of the topics; Good analytical and synthetic skills with arguments expressed in a rigorous manner but with language that is not always appropriate/technical.
• 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the topics; considerable capacity for analysis and synthesis. Good autonomy of judgement. Arguments presented in a rigorous manner and with appropriate/technical language
• 30-30L: Excellent level of knowledge and thorough understanding of topics. Excellent analytical and synthetic skills and independent judgement. Arguments expressed in an original manner and with appropriate technical language.
Course evaluation for attending students: final written and oral exam.
Course evaluation for non-attending students: Final oral exam (100%).
The (default )verification of learning takes place exclusively through a final examination which consists of an individual or group presentation as discussed below. The objective of the final examination is to verify the achievement of the course learning outcome. In particular, the examination assesses the student's overall preparation, ability to integrate knowledge of the different parts of the programme, consequentiality of reasoning, analytical ability and autonomy of judgement. In addition, ownership of language and clarity of exposition are assessed, in adherence with the Dublin descriptors.
Minimum score for passing the written test 18 out of 30.
After listening to the presentations, the lecturers communicate the results to the students registered for the examination via the Delphi system.
Students may take the examination on all available dates. there is no roll-call jump.
The examination will be assessed according to the following criteria:
• FAIL: important deficiencies and/or inaccuracies in the knowledge and understanding of the topics; limited ability to analyse and synthesise, frequent generalisations and limited critical and judgemental skills, the topics are set out inconsistently and with inappropriate language;
• 18-20: Barely sufficient knowledge and understanding of the topics with possible generalisations and imperfections; sufficient capacity for analysis, synthesis and autonomy of judgement, the topics are frequently exposed in an incoherent manner and with inappropriate/technical language;
• 21-23: Routine knowledge and understanding of topics; ability to analyse and synthesise correctly with sufficiently coherent logical argumentation and appropriate/technical language
• 24-26: Fair knowledge and understanding of the topics; Good analytical and synthetic skills with arguments expressed in a rigorous manner but with language that is not always appropriate/technical.
• 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the topics; considerable capacity for analysis and synthesis. Good autonomy of judgement. Arguments presented in a rigorous manner and with appropriate/technical language
• 30-30L: Excellent level of knowledge and thorough understanding of topics. Excellent analytical and synthetic skills and independent judgement. Arguments expressed in an original manner and with appropriate technical language.
Course evaluation for attending students: final written and oral exam.
Course evaluation for non-attending students: Final oral exam (100%).