El juicio de justificación del uso de la fuerza policialTribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos VS. Corte Suprema de los Estados Unidos
- Ruiz Ortiz, Salvador
- Carrillo De Albornoz, Eduardo Osuna
- Mainar Ene, José María
- Martínez Marín, José
ISSN: 0121-0483, 2346-2108
Datum der Publikation: 2018
Ausgabe: 39
Nummer: 107
Seiten: 155-176
Art: Artikel
Andere Publikationen in: Derecho Penal y Criminología
Zusammenfassung
The use of police force is a controversial issue, its justifications is also complex in democratic societies. In this study, research supporting the concept that makes European Court of Human Rights in comparison to the us Supreme Court it addressed, by analyzing various issued by these organs. The objective is know is a convergence process, or not, among these courts in recent years, besides interpretation patterns, common and divergent, trying to make a critical analysis of the phenomenon.
Bibliographische Referenzen
- Alpert, Geoffrey P. & Dunham, Roger G. Understanding police use of force: Officers, suspects, and reciprocity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004.
- Arend, Anthony C. & J. Beck, Robert. International law and the use of force: beyond the UN Charter paradigm. Routledge, London-New York, 2014.
- Blum, Karen M. & Ryan, Jack. Recent Developments in the Use of Excessive Force by Law Enforcement. Touro Law Review, Long Island, NY, vol. 24, n.º 32, 2008, pp. 1-32.
- Einhorn. Hillel J. & Hogarth, Robin M. Judging probable cause. Psychological Bulletin, American Phychological Association, vol. 99, n.º 1, 1986, pp. 3-19.
- Flanders, Chad & Welling, Joseph C. Police Use of Dead by Force: State Statute 30 Years after Garner. slu Law Journal, San Louis, vol. 35, 2016, pp. 109-156.
- Fyfe, James. Police use of force: Research and reform. Justice quarterly, vol. 5, n.º 2, 1998, pp. 165-205.
- García Roca, Francisco Javier. La muy discrecional doctrina del margen de apreciación nacional según el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos: soberanía e integración. Teoría y realidad constitucional, n.º 20, 2007, pp. 117-143.
- Gray, Christine. International law and the use of force. Third Edition, Oxford University Press on Demand, Oxford, 2008.
- Henkin, Louis; Hoffman, Stanley,; Kirkp atrick, Jeane J.; Gerson, Allan,; Rogers William D. & Scheffer, David J.. Right v. might: international law and the use of force. Second Edition, Council on Foreign Relations, New York-London, 1991.
- Hurd, Heidi M. Justification and excuse, wrongdoing and culpability. Notre Dame Law Review, Notre Dame, IN, vol. 74, 1998, pp. 1551-1558.
- Legerski, Mike. Evaluating the Appropriateness of the Pursuit Intervention Technique. Law Enforcement Management Institute of Texas, Texas, 2010.
- Leverick, Fiona. Is English self-defence law incompatible with Article 2 of the echr? Criminal Law Review, London, 2002, pp. 347-362.
- Lobel, Jules & Ratner, Michael. Bypassing the Security Council: Ambiguous Authorizations to Use Force, Cease-Fires and the Iraqi Inspection Regime. American Journal of International Law, American Society of International Law, Washington DC, 1999. pp. 124-154.
- Finnemore, Martha. The purpose of intervention: changing beliefs about the use of force. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 2004, pp. 204-239.
- Murzea, Cristinel I. The theories of interpreting the European Convention of Human Rights–as shown in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights. The Juridical Current, vol. 5, n.º 1, 2013, pp. 54-62.
- Rydberg J., Jason & Terrill, William. The effect of higher education on police behavior. Police Quarterly, vol. 13, n.º 1, 2010, pp. 92-120.
- Simons, Kenneth W. Self-Defense: Reasonable Beliefs or Reasonable Self-Control? New Criminal Law Review: In International and Interdisciplinary Journal, University of California, vol. 11, n.º 1, 2008, pp. 51-90.
- Wallace, Karl R. The substance of rhetoric: Good reasons. Quarterly Journal of Speech, vol. 49, n.º 3, London, 1963, pp. 239-249.
- Yates, Travis. Law enforcement pursuits: Managing the risks. Women Policing, vol. 38, nº. 4, 2004, pp. 10-11.