La Russophobe has moved!

You should be automatically redirected in 6 seconds. If not, visit
http://larussophobe.wordpress.com
and update your bookmarks.

Saturday, October 28, 2006

Annals of Russian Failure Part I: Yet Another Conviction for Russia in the ECHR

The AFP reports that on Thursday Russia received yet another conviction for the violation of human rights, this time regarding Russia's critical problem of environmental contamination. How much evidence of the total failure of the Putin regime do Russians need before they will replace it?

The European Court of Human Rights condemned Russia for not taking appropriate measures to protect four women against toxic emissions from a steel plant. According to the judgment, the four Russian nationals all lived within the buffer zone of the Severstal steel plant in Cherepovets, where the concentration of by-products of steel production regularly exceeded recommended limits. Vladmirovna Zolotareva and three other women launched a complaint against Russia for its failure to protect their private lives and homes from severe environmental pollution, as guaranteed in article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights. During the proceedings, the Court referred to a previous case in which it had already established that the plant's operations did not fully comply with Russia's environmental and health standards. In that case, the court had emphasized that authorities had the option of either resettling the plaintiffs outside of the buffer zone, or reducing toxic emissions. In Thursday's judgment, the court concluded that the Russian authorities failed to take appropriate measures to protect the plaintiffs from serious environmental hazards. The women were awarded damages ranging from 1,500 to 8,000 euros, (1,900 to 10,000 dollars) and were allotted another 800 euros for costs and expenses.

Read the EHCR's full decision here.

5 comments:

17 ugly raccoons said...

Very good. The more decisions such as this, the more clear is that Russia should withdraw from such conventions and say to all these foreign courts FO.

previous case in which it had already established that the plant's operations did not fully comply with Russia's environmental and health standards

Don't worry, when we'll be in power we'll just shot some officials who are responsible for this. Without Western advice.

La Russophobe said...

UGLY: Then I presume you don't favor Russia trying to use the UN to pressure Georgia, right? And you feel the US has a perfect right to do as it please in the world without regard to the opinion of any other country, right?

17 ugly raccoons said...

LR: Yes. Possibilities and agreements are defined by capabilities, not by principles invented of thin air. If US has capability to do something without important consequences from any other country, US has a perfect right to do it. As Russia has. Or Italy, or Uruguay, or Marocco.

La Russophobe said...

UGLY: So then you criticize Russians and Americans who criticize America's invasions of Iraq and Yugoslavia on moral grounds? Can you provide any evidence of such criticism made by you? How about some evidence of your criticizing Russia's attempt to use the UN against Georgia?

17 ugly raccoons said...

LR:So then you criticize Russians and Americans who criticize America's invasions of Iraq and Yugoslavia on moral grounds?

Good question. In some discussions I made such point that it is useless to use 'moral' as argument in criticism or in defence of state (any state) politic. But to say truth, I am unable now to give you a link (I just forgot where these discussions were). If you wish, I can write such article in my blog tomorrow.

How about some evidence of your criticizing Russia's attempt to use the UN against Georgia?

I not wrote about UN (and let's divide here Putin's regime and Russia, OK?), but here in my blog is the phrase "Ivanov's complaints on Georgians to NATO are disgusting". You may read whole post, it's short and not too glorifying Georgia's and Putin's regimes.