Law Journal of the National Academy of Internal Affairs

Despite the fact that the fight against terrorism is recognized as sufficient grounds for a certain limitation of the scope of individual human rights, it does not mean full, absolute freedom of action of the authorities, and in any case requires justification and evidence to support the appropriateness of the use of certain measures that restrict such rights. Inadmissible under any circumstances (including emergency situations within the meaning of Art. 15 of the Convention) is inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Art. 3 of the Convention). The precedents define the features and conditions under which certain activities that could carry terrorist threats (threats) should be dealt with outside the legal protection provided by the Convention. The decisions of the ECHR clearly and consistently formulate the Court’s position regarding the need to balance the respect for human rights and freedoms and the state’s anti-terrorist activities. Consequently, the decisions restricting the rights and freedoms of persons related to the theoretical activities should be carried out taking into account the legal positions of the ECHR, which will contribute not only to the observance of the state’s obligations in the field of human rights, but also will ensure the legality of such decisions.