No abstract

Russia has only recently faced the problem of wearing hijabs in educational organizations

To date, various international treaties have been adopted at the universal and regional levels, guaranteeing the protection of every person’s freedom of conscience and religion. Moreover, international monitoring mechanisms have been established to protect this human freedom within the framework of the UN, as well as various regional organizations (OSCE, Council of Europe, African Union). (1) In this article, the authors analyze these mechanisms and identify both positive practices and negative discriminatory practices against Christians—citizens of the states of the Global South. (2) The methodological basis of the study involves a combination of general scientific (dialectical, historical, inductive, deductive, analytical, synthetic) and particular scientific methods (formal–legal, comparative–legal, interpretative, statistical, procedural, and dynamic). (3) The use of these allowed the authors to identify a number of key problems in the indicated discourse and to draw conclusions. With regard to abortion, the authors conclude that current trend is that, in multiple and various ways, states are pressed to prioritize a woman’s right to life, a woman’s freedom of “reproductive choice” over a doctor’s right to freedom of conscience. The situation is similar with the prioritization of the so-called “rights” of LGBT persons in relation to the rights of believing Christians. Moreover, the authors pay much attention to the analysis of the situation of the prosecution and persecution of Christians in the countries of the Global South, especially in Africa. (4) In conclusion, it is noted that various instruments, both political and legal, have been established in international law which make it possible to identify facts of the violation of freedom of religion and call to account for such acts of discrimination, but they are not always effective.

Having a two years' experience in language tests for limited categories of migrants, Russia introduces an examination in the Russian language, history of Russia and the basics of the Russian legal system for a wider list of foreigners from January 1, 2015. The article reflects legal regulation of the examination introduction. Special attention is given to the development of the legal module of the exam up to the present moment.

В практике Европейского Суда по правам человека есть ряд решений, затрагивающих проблему абортов, последние из которых на октябрь 2020 г. были вынесены в марте 2020 г. (дела Гриммарк против Швеции и Стин против Швеции). Хотя права на аборт в Европейской конвенции по правам человека 1950 г. нет, такие дела рассматриваются, в частности, в контексте права на жизнь (как правило, беременной женщины, но не нерожденного ребенка), права на неприкосновенность частной жизни (как правило, беремен ной женщины, но не, например, отца нерождённого ребенка), свободы вероисповедания (как правило, медицинского работника, отказывающегося от проведения аборта по соображениям совести и обычно не защищаемого Судом) и др. Примечательно, что при вы несении решений по делам об абортах Суд de facto опирается на концепцию так называемых соматических прав человека и чем дальше, тем менее утруждает себя поиском действительного баланса между различными правами человека, оказывающимися в со прикосновении в связи с абортом. Теория о соматических правах человека как правах человека четвертого поколения исходит из мировоззренческого признания права человека на распоряжение собственным телом, чему способствует быстрое развитие биомедицины, биоинженерии и промышленного производства, но противоречит Православному вероучению. В настоящей статье раскрываются основные положения, относящиеся к так называемым соматическим правам человека, особенно репродуктивным, отмечается их расхождение с христианским отношением к жизни и телу человека, приводятся три при мера дел Европейского Суда по правам человека, связанных с абортами, которые свидетельствуют о тенденции признания «права на аборт» в целом и, в частности, в качестве более приоритетного, чем защита свободы вероисповедания, если речь идет об отказе от проведения аборта по соображениям совести медицинского работника. The caselaw of the European Court of Human Rights contains a range of decisions touching upon the problem of abortions. The latest of such decisions, as of October 2020, were issued in March 2020 (Grimmark v. Sweden and Steen v. Sweden). Although there is no right to abortion in the European Convention on Human Rights, the abortion cases are being taken by the Court, inter alia, in context of the right to life (usually that of the pregnant woman, but not of the unborn child), right to respect for private life (usually that of the pregnant woman, but not, e. g. of the father of the unborn child), freedom of religion (usually that of a health care worker refusing to carry out an abortion and generally being left without the protection of the Court), etc. It is notable that, when deciding the abortion cases, the Court de facto employs the concept of the so called somatic human rights and tends recently not to trouble itself with seeking the real balance between the different human rights that become intertwined in connection with abortion. The theory of somatic rights as of fourth generation human rights emanates from the world outlook accepting rights of a person to disposal of one’s body supported by the rapid development of bio medicine, bioengineering and industrial production, but being in contradiction with the Orthodox faith. The present article reveals the basic provisions related to the so called somatic rights, especially reproductive rights, notes their incongruity with the Christian attitude towards a human life and body, brings three examples of the European Court’s of Human Rights cases connected with abortions, that witness a tendency to accept ‘a right to abortion’ generally and, in particular, as a more prioritized one than the protection of the freedom of religion, if the matter concerns the conscientious abjection to carry out an abortion on the part of the health care worker.