Mataki na 12 na Yarjejeniyar Turai kan Haƙƙin Dan Adam

Mataki na 12 na Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam (ECHR) ya ba da haƙƙoƙi guda biyu: haƙƙin yin aure da haƙƙin samun iyali. Tare da yin la'akari dalla-dalla game da 'dokokin ƙasa da ke kula da yin amfani da wannan haƙƙin', Mataki na 12 ya kawo batutuwa game da koyaswar iyaka na godiya, da kuma ƙa'idar da ke da alaƙa da ta fi fice a cikin Dokar Tarayyar Turai. An yi amfani da shi sosai, sau da yawa tare da Mataki na 8 na Yarjejeniyar, don ƙalubalantar kin auren jinsi ɗaya a cikin dokar gida ta ƙasar Kwangila.

 Rubutun 

 Aikace-aikacen 
A matsayin haƙƙin da ke cikin ECHR, Mataki na 12 yana samuwa ga kowa a cikin ikon memba na Majalisar Turai,  in ba haka ba ana ɗaukarsa a matsayin mai kwangila ga Yarjejeniyar.

Hakkin da ke cikin Mataki na 12 yana da alaƙa da Mataki na 8 na Yarjejeniyar, wanda ke tabbatar da haƙƙin girmamawa ga "rayuwar sirri da iyali, gidansa da wasikunsa". , European Convention on Human Rights. Ba a yi amfani da labarin na 12 ba kamar yadda labarin na 8 ya kasance a cikin muhawarar haƙƙin dangi da dangantaka, amma ya taka rawa a cikin muhawarar da ake yi na yin lalata da zargin aure kuma yana taka rawa wajen ƙalubalantar dokoki game da auren jinsi. Domin Mataki na 8 ya kasance tabbataccen tushe don da'awar da suka shafi iyali, dangantaka da gida, shari'a a kan Mataki na 12 an bar shi da bakin ciki sosai.

Irin wannan tanade-tanade ya kasance a cikin adadin wasu takaddun haƙƙin ɗan adam na duniya. ECHR ita ce kayan aiki na farko da ya ba da tasiri ga wasu haƙƙoƙin da aka bayyana a cikin Yarjejeniyar Haƙƙin Bil Adama ta Duniya (UDHR) kuma ta sanya su zama masu ɗaure a cikin Turai.  don haka kamar yadda ake tsammani, Mataki na 16 (1) na UDHR ya ƙunshi irin wannan tanadi: Maza da mata da suka cika shekaru, ba tare da iyakancewa ba saboda launin fata, ƙasa ko addini, suna da hakkin su yi aure kuma su sami iyali.Har ila yau, yarjejeniyar kasa da kasa kan 'yancin jama'a da siyasa (ICCPR) ta ba da tabbacin cewa za a amince da 'yancin yin aure a cikin Mataki na 23(2) Za a amince da haƙƙin maza da mata masu shekaru masu iya yin aure da kuma samun iyali.

 Ka'idar subsidiarity 
Protocol No. 15, not yet in force, introduces specific reference to the principle of subsidiarity in the Preamble of the Convention. Subsidiarity was included in the Treaty on European Union and later the Maastricht Treaty and is a fundamental part of the functioning of European Union law. Von Staden, an international organisations academic, and Jean-Paul Costa, the former President of the Court, have said that an element of subsidiarity that has been integrated into the institutional design of the Court via the requirement that applicants exhaust domestic remedies prior to being eligible to lodge an application at Strasbourg.  Other legal origins of the principle of subsidiarity in the ECHR have been found in Article 1 (obligation to respect human rights), 13 (right to an effective remedy), 19 (establishment of the Court) and 35(1)(admissibility criteria).

Mowbray ya bayyana cewa ka'idar subsidiarity ma'ana da tagwaye. Na farko shine tsarin tsarin da ke buƙatar duk magungunan gida su ƙare kafin gabatar da ƙararraki a Strasburg. Na biyu a cikin mahimmin gaɓoɓin da Kotun ta kayyade ikonta na sake duba hukuncin hukumar cikin gida.  Na karshen yana da sassa uku. Na farko, Kotu ba ta neman a maye gurbin da kotunan cikin gida su taka na farko wajen ba da fassarar dokokin kasa; na biyu, inda Yarjejeniyar ta sanya wani aiki na musamman ga hukumomin kasa; kuma na uku, ta hanyar ƙirƙirar Kotu na gefen koyaswar godiya. 

Mowbray ya bayar da hujjar cewa koyaswar ta samo asali ne na haɗin kai: "wata dabara ce da aka ɓullo da ita don ware ikon yanke shawara ga hukumar da ta dace a cikin tsarin Yarjejeniyar don ƙaddamar da takamaiman lokuta iyaka tsakanin "na farko" na kasa da kasa da kuma kula da "reshen" na kasa da kasa."  Wannan fahimtar ta bambanta tallafi da koyarwar gefen godiya a matsayin ra'ayoyi biyu daban-daban.

Haƙƙin yin aure kamar yadda yake a cikin Mataki na 12 na Yarjejeniyar za a iya ɗaukar takamaiman misali na fahimtar Mowbray na Kotun Turai ta Haƙƙin Dan Adam (ECtHR) na aikace-aikacen babbar gaɓar ƙa'idar haɗin gwiwa. Na farko, “Don kauce wa keta hurumin Jiha, Kotu za ta sa baki ne kawai a lokacin da ya zama dole a yi hakan."  Wannan hankali (don fassara Mataki na 12 yadda ya kamata a cikin ka'idojin cikin gida) ba shi da iyaka kuma ma'ana tafiya tare da kulawar Turai ta hanyar kotu. 

Na biyu, Mataki na 12 ya ba da wani takamaiman aiki na aiki ga hukumomin ƙasa don tabbatar da haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin haƙƙin auratayya a fili ta hanyar kalmominsa. Kuma a ƙarshe, haƙƙin yin aure ya tabbatar da cewa haƙƙi ne inda Kotun ta samar da kyakkyawan rata na godiya. 

 Koyarwar gefen godiya 
Yankin godiya (ko iyakar ikon gwamnati) wani muhimmin bangare ne na shari'ar ECtHR a fassara da amfani da tanadin ECHR. Kamar yadda yake, ba a ambaci shi a bayyane a cikin Yarjejeniyar kanta ba amma samfurin gabobin Strasbourg ne. Aikin gabobin Strasbourg shine bincika fassarorin cikin gida na Yarjejeniyar kuma su yanke shawarar ko sun dace da ka'idojin Yarjejeniyar  kuma ko ya kamata a ba su izini don raguwa wanda "ya hana haƙƙin ta hanyar ko har zuwa irin wannan matakin da ainihin haƙƙin ya lalace".  Saboda haka, ana iya fahimtar gefen godiya a matsayin "al'amarin wanda ke yanke shawara, maimakon abin da waɗannan yanke shawara zasu iya zama".

Hutchinson ya yi bayanin cewa a aikace ɓangarorin yabo game da aiwatar da ƙa'idodin Yarjejeniya a cikin gida na Jiha na iya ƙara faɗi ko ƙunci dangane da yanayin da ake zargin Kotu ta ji. Rashin amincewa daga Yarjejeniyar ya dogara ne akan manufar buƙatun cikin gida a cikin al'ummomin Yarjejeniyar Jiha, don haka sakamako na halitta ya zama yanayin da ke tattare da godiya.

Dangane da ECHR, gefen zai zama karami inda akwai babban matakin yarjejeniyar Turai tsakanin kasashe membobin game da iyakokin da aka yarda da su akan wani haƙƙin Yarjejeniya, kuma ya fi faɗi inda babu irin wannan yarjejeniya. Hakan ya fito fili musamman a shari’a ta 12 da ‘yancin yin aure, musamman dangane da auren jinsi. A cikin shari'o'i fiye da ɗaya, Kotun ta ce dangane da Mataki na 12, Jihohin da ke kwangilar suna jin daɗin "musamman faffadan" rata na yabo wajen ƙayyade matakan da suka dace don haƙƙin Yarjejeniyar kamar wannan don a tabbatar da su a cikin ikonsu.

 Shari'ar shari'a 

 Ƙuntatawa kan aure da aka samu ya halatta 

 Schalk da Kopf v. Austria (2010) 
Schalk da Kopf sun yi zargin nuna bambanci saboda, kasancewar su ma'aurata ne na jinsi ɗaya, an hana su yiwuwar yin aure ko kuma a amince da dangantakarsu ta hanyar doka a cikin dokar cikin gida ta Austriya. Masu nema sun yi jayayya cewa auren jama'a haɗin kai ne na mutane biyu da ke kunshe da dukkan fannoni na rayuwa, kuma haihuwar yara ba ta da mahimmanci ga haɗin aure. Sun yi la'akari da ambaton 'dokokin ƙasa' a cikin Mataki na 12 na Yarjejeniyar ba zai iya nufin cewa an ba jihohi ƙwarewa mara iyaka a cikin tsara wannan haƙƙin ba. Gwamnati ta ci gaba da cewa duka kalmomin da suka dace na Mataki na 12 da kuma shari'ar Kotun kamar yadda ya tsaya sun nuna cewa haƙƙin yin aure ta hanyar dabi'arsa ta iyakance ga ma'aurata daban-daban.

Gwamnatin Austria ta yarda cewa an sami manyan canje-canje na zamantakewa a cikin tsarin aure tun lokacin da aka amince da Yarjejeniyar, amma har yanzu babu wata yarjejeniya ta Turai game da ba da ma'aurata na jinsi ɗaya damar yin aure. Dangane da Mataki na 9 na Yarjejeniya Ta Musamman na Tarayyar Turai, Kotun ba ta ƙara ganin cewa ’yancin yin aure da ke cikin Mataki na 12 na ECHR ba dole ne a taƙaice a kowane yanayi kawai ga aure tsakanin mutane biyu da suka bambanta da jinsi.

Kamar yadda al'amuran suka tsaya, tambayar ko ba da izinin auren jinsi ɗaya ko a'a za a bar shi ga tsari ta hanyar dokar ƙasa ta Jihar Yarjejeniya,  kuma ba a sami keta doka ta 12 ba. Kotun ta ce dole ne a yi la'akari da zabin lafazin na 12 da gangan. An ba da haƙƙin a cikin mahallin ƙa'idodi na al'ada na aure da kuma rashin haɗin kai na Turai ya tabbatar da girman ra'ayi da aka ba wa ƙasashe masu kwangila.

 Parry v. United Kingdom (2006); 
A cikin waɗannan lokuta biyu ma'aurata da suka yi aure kasancewa mace da namiji ga mace bayan aikin gyaran jima'i, sun yi korafi ga kotun cewa a karkashin Mataki na 12 ana buƙatar su kawo karshen aurensu idan mai nema na biyu yana so ya sami cikakken amincewar doka game da canjin jinsi zuwa mace. Wadannan shari'o'in an yi watsi da su kamar yadda ba su da tushe. Har ila yau, Kotun ta yi magana game da ra'ayin gargajiya na aure wanda aka kafa Mataki na 12.

Kotun ta amince da cewa wasu jihohin kwangila sun ba da aure ga ma'aurata iri ɗaya amma sun ci gaba da cewa "wannan ya nuna ra'ayinsu game da rawar da aure ke takawa a cikin al'ummominsu kuma bai fito daga fassarar haƙƙin asali ba kamar yadda jihohin kwangilar suka kafa a cikin Yarjejeniyar a cikin 1950.  A ƙarshe ya fada cikin jihohin kwantar da hankali game da yadda za a tsara tasirin canjin jinsi a kan auren da suka gabata,  kuma saboda haka ba a keta Mataki na 12 a cikin waɗannan lokuta ba.  da F v. United Kingdom (2006) 

 Rees v. United Kingdom (1986); 
A cikin waɗannan lokuta kotun ta gano cewa rashin iyawar masu canza jima'i su auri mutumin da ya saba da jinsi da aka sake ba su ba Kotun ta same shi da keta Mataki na 12. Wannan ya dogara ne akan ra'ayoyin gargajiya na aure; ci gaba da karɓar ƙa'idodin halitta a cikin dokar cikin gida don ƙayyade jima'i na mutum; kuma, cewa irin waɗannan ƙa'idodi a cikin dokokin ƙasa ba za a iya ɗauka a matsayin ƙuntata haƙƙin ta hanyar da ainihin haƙƙin ya lalace. Cossey v. United Kingdom (1990);  Sheffield da Horsham v. United United Kingdom (1998) 

 Klip da Kruger v. Netherlands (1997) 
Matakan da aka dauka game da auren da ya dace.

 Ƙuntatawa a kan aure da aka samu ba za a yarda da shi ba 

 F v. Switzerland (1987) 
Hana aure kafin shekaru uku bayan kisan aure wanda aka sami mai nema da alhakin.

 B da L v. Ƙasar Ingila (2005) 
Hana aure tsakanin namiji da tsohuwar matar ɗansa a lokacin rayuwar mahaifiyar ɗansa da ɗansa.

 Draper v. United Kingdom (1980) 
Rashin damar yin aure ga fursuna.

 Christine Goodwin v. United Kingdom (2002) 
Kotun ta rabu da dalilinta na tarihi game da samun sabawa sashe na 12 na Yarjejeniyar a wannan shari'ar. Mai neman canjin jinsi ta ce ita da abokiyar zamanta ba za su iya yin aure ba saboda doka ta dauke ta a matsayin namiji saboda ka’idojin halitta wadanda suka kayyade jinsi don dalilai na aure a cikin dokar gida. Gwamnatin Burtaniya ta ci gaba da cewa ba Mataki na 12 na Yarjejeniyar ba, ko kuma Mataki na 8 da ke da alaƙa da shi ba da izinin mai canza jima'i ko mai canza jinsi ya auri mutum na asali: "idan za a yi wani canji a cikin wannan muhimmin yanki ko mai mahimmanci, ya kamata ya fito ne daga kotunan Burtaniya da ke aiki a cikin iyakar godiya wanda wannan Kotun ta ba da ita. "

Kotun ta yi la'akari da sharuddan Mataki na 12 wanda ke nufin haƙƙin "mutum da mace" na yin aure ba lallai ba ne a fahimci su azaman ƙayyade jinsi ta hanyar ka'idojin halitta kawai. Ba a shawo kansa ya bar al'amarin gaba ɗaya a cikin iyakar godiya ta Jihohin Yarjejeniya ba, don hana iyakar da ta kai har zuwa ba da damar Jihohin Kundin Yarjejeniya su haifar da ingantaccen mashaya akan duk wani amfani da haƙƙin ta masu canza jima'i. Duk da yake yana ga jihar Yarjejeniya don ƙayyade yanayin da ke kewaye da amincewar jinsi na doka don masu canza jima'i bayan aiki da tasirinsa a kan auren jima'i na yanzu, bai kamata a hana mai canza jima'in jin daɗin haƙƙin yin aure a kowane hali ba. Kotun ta kammala cewa ba zai yiwu ba ga mai canza jima'i bayan tiyata ya yi aure a cikin jinsi da aka ba shi ya keta Mataki na 12 na Yarjejeniyar.

 Littattafai 


 Hutchinson, Michael R. "The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine a Kotun Turai ta 'Yancin Dan Adam", The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, Vol. 48, No. 3 (Yuli, 1999), shafuffuka na 638-650. 
 [Inda Aka Ɗauko Hoto da ke shafi na 5] 'Shin Mataki na 12 na Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam ya shafi ma'aurata masu jinsi guda? '. Kotunan Turai.
 Johnson, Paul da Falcetta, Silvia (2018) 'Auren jinsi ɗaya da Mataki na 12 na Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam'. Littafin Bincike kan Jima'i, Jima'a da Shari'a (Edward Elgar Publishing, Forthcoming).
 Mowbray, Alastair. "Subsidiarity da Yarjejeniyar Turai kan 'Yancin Dan Adam", Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Yuni, 2015), shafuffuka 313-341. 

 Manazarta 

Rukuni:Shafuka masu fassarorin da ba'a duba ba