English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper will discuss the constitutional relevance of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), i.e. the manner how the constitutional judiciary of North Macedonia enforces its provisions. It is important to stress that the ECHR does not provide for a specific way to ensure the implementation of guaranteed human rights and freedoms. It is left to each country to create its own path which, on the other hand, points to the fact that the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) cannot act as a supra-national fourth court instance, or as a supra-national Pan-European supreme court. This means that constitutional relevance and the margin of appreciation are related to, and dependent on, each other. Moreover, this paper will analyse the implementation of the ECHR's provisions by the Constitutional Court of North Macedonia as well as the objective and pragmatic need to extend the normative scope of the legal institution of a constitutional complaint, in order to advance and strengthen the constitutional-judicial protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution of North Macedonia.

The implementation of the ECHR and the need to extend the scope of consitutional complaint mechanism in North Macedonia