57 Spring-Summer 2017 exception of crimes of genocide. Different approaches between ECtHR and the Israeli courts exist, with regard to euthanasia and the right to life of embryos. Absolute interdiction of torture is upheld both in Europe and in Israel even in emergency cases, where the lives of others are at stake. The prohibition of slavery and servitude has become relevant in the 21st century and both the ECtHR and Israeli courts have faced new cases that dealt with modern slavery and human trafficking. The right of liberty and security of a person requires a balance with other public interests. This balance seems to be treated differently by the ECHR than by Israeli courts. The latter rely on the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty. The book concludes this comparison by saying that the enforcement of this provision in Europe has yet a long way to go. Two basic norms of criminal justice: the right to a fair trial and the prohibition of retroactive penal legislation are treated similarly by the ECHR and by Israeli Law. Following World War Two, both systems apply the same exception to this rule with regard to Nazi criminals and their collaborators. The right to respect for individuals' private and family life, home and correspondence involves inter alia legal questions regarding the right to parenthood, children's rights, immigrants' rights, homosexuality, prisoners' rights, and the environment. The book notes a more liberal approach by the Israeli Courts, compared to ECtHR, with regard to IVF in cases where one party withholds consent. With regard to the consideration of the best interests of the child, the European Court had to justify the stay of an Israeli child in Switzerland on grounds of his best interest not to be returned to his father in Israel. The right to marry and to found a family raises legal questions regarding the rights of same-sex partners to marry. This right was denied by the Strasbourg Court for lack of a general European consensus on the issue. The book examines attempts by ECHR and the Israeli Courts to balance the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion with other rights. Comparing ECtHR judgments dealing with Christian and with Jewish religious issues, it raises a question whether the ECtHR showed more sensitivity in the former than in the latter cases (referring to Cha’are Shalom Ve Tsedek v. France). The chapter on freedom of expression is the longest chapter in the book mainly due to recent developments. The question of the absolute or limited nature of the right is still unresolved. The attitude of the ECHR is to limit the right to freedom of expression. European case law is clear that the denial of the Holocaust is not protected by freedom of expression (Garaudy v. France) and the denial of the Holocaust is distinguished from the denial of the Armenian genocide (Perincek v. Switzerland). The historic debate over the Armenian massacres is not over yet and denying their character as genocide is not prompted by hate or justification of the atrocities, as it is in the case of the Holocaust. Hate speech and racism is also not protected by freedom of expression or freedom of assembly (Vona v. Hungary). Racist parades against Gypsies and Jews in Hungary were considered a violation of a higher right prevailing over the right to freedom of expression. The right to property is dealt with briefly and shows similarities between Europe and Israel. The right to education is vigorously upheld both by the ECtHR and by the Israeli Courts. Both respect the values of parents in the spirit of ECHR's Protocol. The Israeli law also relies on the Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989, ratified by Israel in 1991. The author recommends updating the old European provision and to recognize that not only the parents have certain rights but that children should be made the subjects of the right to education. In the ECHR, the right for free elections expresses a commitment taken by the member states rather than as a right of individuals. While the ECtHR's case law interpreting this provision deals with the rights of prisoners and bankrupt individuals to vote, Israeli cases deal with the legitimacy of political lists of candidates to be elected as Knesset delegates. Lastly, the book briefly mentions the general nondiscrimination provision included in the ECHR's Protocol 12, in force since 2005 and ratified so far by 20 of 47 member states. Third Part – Conclusion The third and last part of the book reiterates the importance of the ECtHR as an accessible forum for individuals, offering effective enforcement against their national state. It highlights its accessibility to petitioners from non-ECHR countries and emphasizes the dynamic and evolving interpretation of the Court in the changing spirit of the times. The use of the Convention as a source of values and inspiration to Israeli courts is made easily accessible. The Convention has proved to be a living instrument in spite of its age, progressing with the times as a result of the jurisprudence of the Court. As a lawyer and a professor of public international law, I believe that this unique book in Hebrew fills a gap in the study and promotion of human rights. This book already made its first contribution to the Israeli jurisprudence in the case of Julani v. the State of Israel (CA 6237/12, 6.9.2016, paras. 34-35) where the Israeli Supreme
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=