scholarly journals The Veiled Irreverence of the Italian Constitutional Court and the Contours of the Right to Silence for Natural Persons in Administrative Proceedings

Author(s):  
Luigi Lonardo
Author(s):  
Oksana Shcherbanyuk

The article explores the problems of implementation of the constitutional complaint in Ukraine and proposes ways of its solving. The article analyses the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine clarifies the admissibility criteria of the constitutional complaint in Ukraine, the procedural filters and proposed solutions of problems to improve the protection of rights and lawful interests of persons. The analysis of the content of the constitutional complaint indicates that the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is most often addressed the citizens of Ukraine with a petition regarding the implementation of the right of everyone to judicial review (in particular, cassation in cases of minor difficulties in administrative proceedings). Also appealed to the citizens with constitutional complaints in relation to social issues to protect their rights stipulated in the legislative acts that have undergone changes, in particular, with respect to the social (pension) insurance of certain categories of citizens (police, military, civil servants, prosecutors). While the Board and the Senate of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine often refused to open constitutional proceedings on the grounds of inadmissibility of the constitutional complaint (paragraph 4 of article 62 of the law of Ukraine on the constitutional Court of Ukraine), which is indicated at 136 decisions of Collegium of judges and 8 resolutions of the Senates. It is concluded that the mechanism of the submission and consideration of the constitutional complaint, the algorithm of selection (filtering) of the constitutional complaints needs significant improvement with consideration for the European experience. In our opinion, the legal effect of the constitutional-legal institution will be made only in connection with the introduction of a complete, not normative constitutional complaint, which will significantly increase the responsibility of subjects of law-making, law enforcement, protection of human rights and ensure the authority of the Constitution of Ukraine.


2020 ◽  
Vol 90 (3) ◽  
pp. 162-176
Author(s):  
М. А. Самбор

The author has researched the practice of the executive branch of power of Ukraine in establishing a collective (general) ban and restriction of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly under quarantine, as well as the place and role of the judicial branch of power represented by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in determining the constitutionality of such restrictions and prohibitions. The powers of the Supreme Court on the constitutional submission to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine on the constitutionality of the Resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine “On quarantine to prevent the spread of acute respiratory disease COVID-19 caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and stages of weakening of anti-epidemic measures” dated from May 20, 2020 No. 392 on the establishment of a ban on the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly within administrative proceedings during the introduction of quarantine in Ukraine, as well as the justification of such a constitutional submission. It is important to analyze and form a legal understanding of the Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine on the unconstitutionality of restricting and prohibiting the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly during quarantine within administrative proceedings – by adopting the relevant resolution by the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine, which was the result of administrative discretion of the highest agency in the system of executive agencies of Ukraine. In this regard, the study focuses on the motivation and validity of the decision of the agency of constitutional jurisdiction and understanding of those legal and social values that were the basis for the judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine while adopting the decision dated from August 28, 2020 No 10-r/2020.


Author(s):  
Лев Бардин ◽  
Lev Bardin

The law establishes that representatives in the courts can be both lawyers and other persons providing legal assistance, as well as legal representatives. The Constitutional Court in its Resolution No. 15-P of 16.07.2004 indicated that representatives of legal entities in arbitration proceedings can be any person. But in accordance with Item II (A) (a) of the List of Specific Obligations of the Russian Federation for Services Included in Annex I to the Protocol of 16 December 2011 "On the Accession of the Russian Federation to the Marrakesh Agreement on the establishing of the WTO", only those who received the status Lawyer in accordance with Russian law, has the right to represent in criminal courts and Russian arbitration courts, as well as act as a representative of organizations in civil and administrative proceedings and proceedings on cases of administrative violations. Appropriate legislative changes are needed. The law states that the use of the terms "advocacy", "lawyer", "lawyer's chamber", "lawyer’s entity" in the names of organizations is allowed only by lawyers. Every year, Russia's tax inspections register dozens of organizations set up by non-layers, illegally including the above terms in their names. The law should provide not only prohibitions, but also sanctions for violation of these prohibitions. Collegiums of advocates often include the phrase "partners" in their names. But lawyers - members of the board are not partners and do not sign partnership agreements. Partners can not be among the governing bodies of the collegium . The application by collegiums of lawyers of the rules provided for non-commercial partnerships by the Federal Law "On Non-Profit Organizations" in the part of partners is illegal. Only lawyers can establish a lawyer’s bureau and conclude a partnership agreement. But in practice in lawyer’s bureau, persons who do not have the status of a lawyer become partners. In other countries, in associating lawyers limited liability partnerships, along with partners, there are "associates". The introduction of such "associates" in our lawyer’s bureau will be a good alternative to attempts to include commercial organizations in the composition of lawyer entities.


Author(s):  
Yaroslav Skoromnyy ◽  

The article presents the conceptual foundations of bringing judges to civil and legal liability. It was found that the civil and legal liability of judges is one of the types of legal liability of judges. It is determined that the legislation of Ukraine provides for a clearly delineated list of the main cases (grounds) for which the state is liable for damages for damage caused to a legal entity and an individual by illegal actions of a judge as a result of the administration of justice. It has been proved that bringing judges to civil and legal liability, in particular on the basis of the right of recourse, provides for the payment of just compensation in accordance with the decision of the European Court of Human Rights. It was established that the bringing of judges to civil and legal liability in Ukraine is regulated by such legislative documents as the Constitution of Ukraine, the Civil Code of Ukraine, the Explanatory Note to the European Charter on the Status of Judges (Model Code), the Law of Ukraine «On the Judicial System and the Status of Judges», the Law of Ukraine «On the procedure for compensation for harm caused to a citizen by illegal actions of bodies carrying out operational-search activities, pre-trial investigation bodies, prosecutors and courts», Decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the case on the constitutional submission of the Supreme Court of Ukraine regarding the compliance of the Constitution of Ukraine (constitutionality) of certain provisions of Article 2, paragraph two of clause II «Final and transitional provisions» of the Law of Ukraine «On measures to legislatively ensure the reform of the pension system», Article 138 of the Law of Ukraine «On the judicial system and the status of judges» (the case on changes in the conditions for the payment of pensions and monthly living known salaries of judges lagging behind in these), the Law of Ukraine «On the implementation of decisions and the application of the practice of the European Court of Human Rights».


2017 ◽  
pp. 67-86
Author(s):  
Arkadiusz Krajewski

The Constitutional Tribunal is defined as the Polish constitutional court and at the same time the judicial authority. It was created at the turn of 1982. Not long after that it began its jurisprudence; more precisely it was in 1986. Describing its basic tasks, it is pointed out that judicial review of so-called constitutional law deserves a closer look. This is particularly true about controlling the compliance of lower legal norms with higher legal norms. Here attention is drawn towards the connection of the Constitution with some international agreements, ie. the court of law. The purpose of the paper below was to analyze the constitutional principles of criminal proceedings in the context of the case law of the Polish Constitutional Court. At the beginning the concept, the division and the role of the constitutional rules of criminal procedure were presented. In this section, it was emphasized that all the rules of the criminal process are considered superior norms of a very significant social importance. Then the principle of objectivity, which is reflected in the Constitution of the Republic, was described. A following aspect was the discussion of the principle of the presumption of innocence and the principle of in dubio pro reo. It has been emphasized that the essence of the principle is that the person who was brought before the court is treated as innocent until a lawful judgment is pronounced against the defendant. The author also pointed out the principle of the right to defense. According to this rule, the defendant has the right to defend themselves in the process and to use the help of a defender. Another described principle is so-called rule of publicity. It concerns the fact that information about criminal proceedings should be accessible to the public. Then it was pointed to the principle of the right to the trial and the independence of the judiciary. The first one is reflected in national law and acts of international rank. The second shows that the independence of the judiciary is determined by the proper exercise of the profession of judge and becomes a guarantee of freedom and civil rights. The humanitarian principle and the principle of participation of the social factor in the penal process are shown in the final section. At the end of the paper a summary and conclusions were presented.


2017 ◽  
Vol 61 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan John Cooper

AbstractDespite a constitutional right to water, challenges remain for access to sufficient water in South Africa. This article considers the degree to which current legal provisions perpetuate approaches that are antithetical to genuinely eco-socio-sustainable water access. Water in South Africa has largely been re-cast as a commodity, exposed to market rules, proving problematic for many and giving rise to various responses, including litigation. In the seminal case of Mazibuko, the Constitutional Court failed to provide robust protection to the right to water, providing impetus for the formation of “commons” strategies for water allocation. Indeed, “commoning” is beginning to represent not only an emerging conceptual strand in urban resource allocation, but also a dynamic, contemporary, eco-sensitive, socio-cultural phenomenon, driving innovative, interactive and inclusive forms of planning and social engagement. Against the backdrop of unequal water access, commoning offers glimpses of an empowering and enfranchising subaltern paradigm.


2015 ◽  
Vol 109 (2) ◽  
pp. 400-406
Author(s):  
Riccardo Pavoni

With Judgment No. 238/2014, the Italian Constitutional Court (hereinafter Court) quashed the Italian legislation setting out the obligation to comply with the sections of the 2012 decision of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy; Greece intervening) (Jurisdictional Immunities or Germany v. Italy) that uphold the rule of sovereign immunity with respect to compensation claims in Italian courts based on grave breaches of human rights, including—in the first place—the commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Court found the legislation to be incompatible with Articles 2 and 24 of the Italian Constitution, which secure the protection of inviolable human rights and the right of access to justice (operative paras. 1, 2).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document