An Assessment on Limitations and Restrictions of the Fundamental Rights in Strasbourg Legal Order

All human rights and fundamental freedoms are subject to the general rule that no one has the right to engage in activities or perform acts that aim to destroy any of the rights and freedoms recognized under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). In certain cases, it is legitimate to impose restrictions on individual rights to protect the broader societal interests and the rights of others. The common good may justify such restrictions to ensure public order, national security, or other legitimate aims as recognized in the ECHR. The aim of these restrictions is to preserve the moral and democratic values of society and the rights and freedoms of others. These limitations are referred to as “permissible limitations” or “restrictions” within the context of the European Convention on Human Rights. Each right is defined within its respective article, alongside the conditions that justify its limitation. The grounds for restriction must be reasonably based, lawful, and proportionate to the legitimate aim being pursued. Importantly, these limitations must be created through proper legal procedures and must be clearly accessible, transparent, and understandable to the public. This approach reflects the delicate balance between individual freedoms and the just demands of society, ensuring the effective operation of government while safeguarding fundamental rights. Courts, particularly the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), play a critical role in determining whether these restrictions are necessary in a democratic society, ensuring that they do not undermine the essence of the right being limited.