The Constitutional Right to Appeal Against an Administrative Decision

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to identify the fundamental values of the Ukrainian people, on the basis of which not only his mentality, but also all national-state institutions, including institutions of justice and justice, as well as to identify trends of influence of these values on the further development of legal foundations of the judiciary and justice of Ukraine. Method. The methodological basis of the study was the combination of principles and methods of scientific knowledge. For the objectivity of the research, a set of general scientific, special-legal, special-historical and philosophical methods of scientific knowledge was used. Results. At the current stage of reforming the institutions of the judiciary and the judiciary, the notion of fair justice, which is formed on the basis of popular national culture, plays an important role. Given the functioning of the modern Constitutional Court of Ukraine, whose representatives are formed by delegation to the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, the President of Ukraine, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine and the judiciary, this institution needs radical reform as it has repeatedly made political rather than constitutional decisions. Scientific novelty. Based on the analysis of the national tradition of justice, it is established that the Constitutional Court should be formed by public organizations, which are formed by legal experts. There are several higher scientific institutions in Ukraine which have departments, constitutional law research institutes. Their representatives should delegate the best experts in the constitutional right to competitive selection to fill vacancies in the constitutional court. Practical importance. The results of the study can be used in further historical and legal studies, preparation of special courses.

Download Full-text

The Constitutional Principle of Accountability: A Study of Contemporary South African Case Law

Southern African Public Law ◽

10.25159/2522-6800/2955 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 33 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Chuks Okpaluba

Keyword(s):

Judicial Review ◽

Police Officers ◽

Public Procurement ◽

Case Law ◽

The State ◽

Constitutional Principle ◽

Starting Point ◽

The Law ◽

Constitutional Right ◽

The Many

‘Accountability’ is one of the democratic values entrenched in the Constitution of South Africa, 1996. It is a value recognised throughout the Constitution and imposed upon the law-making organs of state, the Executive, the Judiciary and all public functionaries. This constitutional imperative is given pride of place among the other founding values: equality before the law, the rule of law and the supremacy of the Constitution. This study therefore sets out to investigate how the courts have grappled with the interpretation and application of the principle of accountability, the starting point being the relationship between accountability and judicial review. Therefore, in the exercise of its judicial review power, a court may enquire whether the failure of a public functionary to comply with a constitutional duty of accountability renders the decision made illegal, irrational or unreasonable. One of the many facets of the principle of accountability upon which this article dwells is to ascertain how the courts have deployed that expression in making the state and its agencies liable for the delictual wrongs committed against an individual in vindication of a breach of the individual’s constitutional right in the course of performing a public duty. Here, accountability and breach of public duty; the liability of the state for detaining illegal immigrants contrary to the prescripts of the law; the vicarious liability of the state for the criminal acts of the police and other law-enforcement officers (as in police rape cases and misuse of official firearms by police officers), and the liability of the state for delictual conduct in the context of public procurement are discussed. Having carefully analysed the available case law, this article concludes that no public functionary can brush aside the duty of accountability wherever it is imposed without being in breach of a vital constitutional mandate. Further, it is the constitutional duty of the courts, when called upon, to declare such act or conduct an infringement of the Constitution.

Download Full-text