scholarly journals CONSTITUTIONAL LEGAL DISPUTES BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT OF ROMANIA AND OTHER PUBLIC AUTHORITIES IN THE CASE-LAW OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF ROMANIA

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-95
Author(s):  
Mihaela SIMION
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Political Context ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
The Public ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
Presidential System

Article 146 (e) of the Romanian Constitution stipulates the power of the Constitutional Court to solve legal disputes of a constitutional nature between public authorities. Thus, the Constitutional Court solves or settles constitutional disputes between the authorities belonging to the three powers in the state. These situations may concern disputes between two or more constitutional authorities regarding the content or length of their powers, as provided for by the Constitution. The result sought is to overcome possible institutional blockages.From 2005, when the Constitutional Court of Romania first decided on such dispute, and until today, thirteen decisions for settling certain disputes between the President of Romania and other public authorities have been issued. The multitude of disputes is due, primarily, to the semi-presidential system of government provided for by the Constitution and to the ambiguous provisions regarding the division of powers between the Romanian President, Government, Parliament and the judicial power. Last but not least, this dispute is due to a certain political context, too. The present paper aims to analyze the case-law of the Constitutional Court of Romania regarding the constitutional legal disputes between the President of Romania and other public authorities, as well as its impact on the constitutional order and the relationships between the public authorities from the checks and balances system.

Crisis of the Rule of Law in Europe: The Cases of Hungary, Poland and Spain

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 379-398
Author(s):  
David Parra Gómez
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Social Rights ◽  
Institutional Reforms ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
European Democracy ◽  
Aggressive Interference

Democracy is an instrument at the service of a noble purpose: to ensure the freedom and equality of all citizens by guaranteeing the civil, political and social rights contained in constitutional texts. Among the great principles on which this instrument rests is the division of powers, which consists, substantially, in the fact that power is not concentrated, but that the various functions of the State are exercised by different bodies, which, moreover, control each other. Well, the increasingly aggressive interference of the Executive and, to a lesser extent, the Legislative in material spheres that should be reserved exclusively for the Judiciary, violates this principle and, for this reason, distorts the idea of democracy, an alarming trend that, for some time now, are observed in European Union countries such as Hungary, Poland and Spain. Preventing the alarming degradation of European democracy, of which these three countries are an example, requires not only more than necessary institutional reforms to ensure respect for these principles and prevent the arbitrariness of the public authorities, but also a media network and an education system that explains and promotes these values and principles, that is, one that makes citizens aware of and defend constitutionalism. Keywords: Rule of law; Democracy; Separation of powers; judicial independence; Europe.

scholarly journals Legal Mechanisms for Protection of Migrants' Rights by the Public Authorities of the Russian Federation

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ksenia Minakova
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Migration Policy ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Special Role ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Normative Documents ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Migrants Rights

The article analyzes methods of ensuring the migrants rights by the public authorities of the Russian Federation, the individual elements of the migration policy of the Russian Federation relating to the activities of public authorities. It considers the activities in the field of protection of the migrants rights by such authorities as the Russian President's Office for Constitutional Rights of Citizens, the Presidential Council for Civil Society and Human Rights, the Council for Interethnic Relations, General Directorate for Migration, Chief Directorate for Migration Issues of Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, their normative documents, that regulate their activities. It examines separately the activities of the RF Government in the field of protection of the migrants rights, as well as judicial authorities; it identifies the special role of the RF Constitutional Court in the field of ensuring the rights of migrants, refugees, the internally displaced and stateless persons. It underlines the role of authority bodies of the RF entities in ensuring the migrants rights in terms of Irkursk Oblast. The article offers to differentiate strictly the role of each authority body in the field of migrants rights protection, as well as to pay specific attention to regulation of activities of the FR entities authority bodies in this direction.

scholarly journals Impeachment in the United States and Muerte Cruzada in Ecuador

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 287-305
Author(s):  
Manuela Cárdenas Cifuentes
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Political Parties ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Stability ◽  
Public Power ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
The Public ◽  
Effective Application ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
Rhetorical Figures

The figure of impeachment in the United States and that of muerte cruzada in Ecuador are two political figures created with a double purpose. The first, is to demonstrate that there is a clear division of powers in the governmental sphere; and second, to serve as a checks and balances mechanism that controls the actions of the public power, especially those of the president of the nation. As such, these figures have an important role because they seek to maintain democracy and political, social and economic stability of the countries involved. The problem that arises when trying to put these tools into practice is that they clash with the power of the strongest political parties. Thus, its effectiveness is put at risk and the doubt of its true usefulness arises. This article will focus on analyzing how effective these figures have been to remove presidents from office. To achieve that end, research will be conducted, first of all, to define both figures and find a useful meaning in their existence; later, it will analyze if there are cases in which these political figures have been tried to be applied and if they succeeded or failed and, finally, determine if the figures in these countries are truly political tools to control public power, or if they are only rhetorical figures that have no practical use since there are barriers to their real and effective application.

scholarly journals The range of instruments of mechanism for interaction between the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 5-11
Author(s):  
N. V. Moskalets
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Society ◽  
Performance Indicators ◽  
Monitoring And Evaluation ◽  
The State ◽  
Individual Responsibility ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Civil Society Development

In the article, basing on investigation of the interaction of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine with the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in ensuring the rights and freedoms there was proposed the range of instruments of mechanism for interaction based on proper governance, monitoring and evaluation, including performance indicators and effectiveness, individual responsibility of a person authorized to perform the functions of the state. Due to its implementation, the public authorities will provide priority-oriented constitutional guarantees, namely human rights and freedoms in the context of promoting civil society development in Ukraine. In the article, basing on investigation of the interaction of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine with the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine in ensuring the rights and freedoms there was proposed the range of instruments of mechanism for interaction based on proper governance, monitoring and evaluation, including performance indicators and effectiveness, individual responsibility of a person authorized to perform the functions of the state. Due to its implementation, the public authorities will provide priority-oriented constitutional guarantees, namely human rights and freedoms in the context of promoting civil society development in Ukraine. In order to enhance the implementation of the range of instruments of mechanism for interaction between the Constitutional Court of Ukraine with other public authorities, there was offered the introduction of electronic document management as a preventive anti-corruption measure with integrated monitoring and transparency mechanisms of activity of public authorities in order to reduce the level of corruption and hierarchical influence, for the purpose of openness and transparency, efficiency of activity within the democratic processes.

scholarly journals Penerapan Asas Audi Alteram Et Partem Pada Perkara Judicial review Di Mahkamah Agung

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 37
Author(s):  
Asep Syarifuddin Hidayat
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Trial Process ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Impact

Abstract.Article 13 paragraph 1 of Act Number 48 of 2009 concerning Judicial Power states that all court hearings are open to the public, unless the Act says otherwise. Therefore, a judicial review trial must be open to the public. If the trial process of the judicial review is carried out in a closed manner, it can be considered a legal defect, because it is contrary to Article 13 paragraph (3) of the Law. The Law of the Supreme Court is not regulated that the judicial review is closed, because in the judicial review there is a need for openness or principle of audiences of parties or litigants must be given the opportunity to provide information and express their opinions, including the defendant as the maker of Legislation invitation under the law, so that the impact of the decision will need to be involved.Keywords: Judicial Review, Audi Alteram Et Partem Principle, Supreme Court, Constitutional Court Abstrak.Pasal 13 ayat 1 Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman menyebutkan semua sidang pemeriksaan pengadilan terbuka untuk umum, kecuali Undang-Undang berkata lain. Oleh karena itu,  judicial review persidangan harus dilakukan terbuka untuk umum. Apabila proses persidangan judicial review ini dilakukan secara tertutup, maka dapat dinilai cacat hukum karena bertentangan dengan Pasal 13 ayat (3) Undang-Undang tersebut. Undang-Undang Mahkamah Agung pun tidak diatur bahwa persidangan judicial review bersifat tertutup, karena dalam judicial review perlu adanya keterbukaan atau asas audi alteram et partem atau pihak-pihak yang berperkara harus diberi kesempatan untuk memberikan keterangan dan menyampaikan pendapatnya termasuk pihak termohon sebagai  pembuat Peraturan Perundang-Undangan di bawah Undang-Undang sehingga akan terkena dampak putusan perlu dilibatkan.Kata Kunci: Judicial Review, Asas Audi Alteram Et Partem, Mahkamah Agung, Mahkamah Konstitusi.

European Fundamental Rights and the Member States: From ‘Selective’ to ‘Total’ Incorporation?

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 337-361
Author(s):  
Robert Schütze
Keyword(s):  
Member State ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Member States ◽  
State Action ◽  
The Public ◽  
Constitutional Order ◽  
European Institutions ◽  
Constitutional Thought

AbstractIn parallel with American constitutional thought, there exists a doctrine of incorporation in the European legal order. European fundamental rights will thus not exclusively limit the European institutions. They may—in certain situations—equally apply to the public authorities of the Member States. This chapter looks at the incorporation doctrine across the three sources of European fundamental rights. With three distinct sources of fundamental rights, the constitutional principles governing the European incorporation doctrine are unsurprisingly more complex than the American incorporation doctrine. What are the similarities and dissimilarities between the European and the American incorporation doctrine? The Union presently favours selective over total incorporation. In this respect, it emulates the American constitutional order. Yet the European doctrine nonetheless differs strikingly from the classic American doctrine. For unlike the latter, the European legal order has not made incorporation dependent on the type of fundamental right at issue. The European doctrine has, by contrast, made the incorporation of Union fundamental rights into national legal orders dependent on the type of Member State action.

The Judicial Elaboration of Standards for Public Administrations in France

2021 ◽  
pp. 113-131
Author(s):  
Jérémy Mercier
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Public Services ◽  
Institutional Context ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Public Power ◽  
The Public ◽  
Creative Role

This chapter underlines how administrative law has taken a much greater significance in France since the period 1890–1910. This period is not only symbolic of a full development of administrative law around the notion of public power (puissance publique) or public service (service public) but also of the ramifications given to the very notion of State and public administration. The chapter deals with different theories (Hauriou, Duguit, etc.) related to a redefinition of the State and public services. It discusses four specific aspects: the institutional context, the case law of the Conseil d’État, the innovative orientations concerning the action of the public authorities, and the creative role of this case law.

‘Guardian of the Solemn Pact’ – The Role of the Constitutional Court in South Africa’s Constitutional Transition

2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 355-385
Author(s):  
Brynne Guthrie
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Political Context ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
Unique Role ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Impact

The Constitutional Court of South Africa has played a unique role in the country’s constitutional transition. This paper starts by detailing the historical and political context of the Interim Constitution which created the Constitutional Court and the constitutional principles. The article describes the approach of the Court in the First Certification Judgment (1996), analysing the impact of the Constitutional Court’s decision on the drafting of the final Constitution and the public more generally, before briefly outlining the role that the Court continues to play in protecting constitutional democracy as a ‘Guardian of the Solemn Pact’.

Niedbala v. Poland

2000 ◽  
Vol 11 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 355-359
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Minimum Degree ◽  
Democratic Society ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Degree Of Protection ◽  
Order Release ◽  
Domestic Law

The officer who is to review the circumstances militating for and against detention and to decide, by reference to legal criteria, whether there are reasons to justify detention and to order release if there are no such reasons must satisfy certain conditions providing a guarantee to the person detained against any arbitrary or unjustified deprivation of liberty. Thus, the “officer” must be independent of the executive and of the parties. In this case applicant was deprived of liberty by a decision of a prosecutor who had not been a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power. Furthermore, an arrested or detained person is entitled to bring proceedings for the review by a court of the procedural and substantive conditions which are essential for the “lawfulness” of his or her deprivation of liberty. The procedure must have a judicial character and provide guarantees appropriate to the kind of deprivation of liberty in question, in particular, in the proceedings in which an appeal against detention order is being examined, “equality of arms” between the parties must be ensured. Domestic law on control of mail of prisoners must indicate with reasonable clarity the scope and manner of exercise of the relevant discretion conferred on the public authorities so as to ensure to individuals the minimum degree of protection to which citizens are entitled under the rule of law in a democratic society.

scholarly journals Ejecutividad y prescripción de las sanciones administrativas en las Leyes 39/2015, del Procedimiento Administrativo Común de las Administraciones Públicas y 40/2015, de Régimen Jurídico del Sector Público

2018 ◽  
pp. 57-95
Author(s):  
Carmen CHINCHILLA MARÍN
Keyword(s):  
Public Sector ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court

LABURPENA: Sektore Publikoaren Araubide Juridikoari buruzko 40/2015 Legeak arau berria sartu du zigorrak preskribitzeko epearen zenbaketaren inguruan, zigorren aurka jarritako gora jotzeko errekurtsoak administrazioaren isiltasunaren bidez ezesten diren kasuetarako. Hala, lege horren 30.3. artikuluan ezarritakoaren arabera, errekurtsoa ustez ezesten bada, errekurtso horren ebazpena emateko legez aurreikusi den epea amaitu eta hurrengo egunetik aurrera hasi behar da zenbatzen zigorra preskribitzeko epea. Preskripzioari buruzko arau berri horrek, zentzuzkoa denez, ondorioak eduki behar ditu zigorrak betearazteko araubidearen gainean, zigorra bete behar izatea baita zigorra preskribatzeko oinarria. Artikulu honetan, bi berritasun horien berri ematen da, eta kontraesan-arazoa aztertzen, Konstituzio Auzitegiak eta Auzitegi Gorenak errekurtso-bideko isiltasunaren eta isiltasun horrek zigorren preskripzioaren eta bete behar izatearen gainean dituen ondorioen —hobeto esanda, «ondorio-ezaren»— inguruan duten jurisprudentziari dagokionez. RESUMEN: la Ley 40/2015, de Régimen jurídico del Sector público, ha introducido una nueva regla sobre el cómputo del plazo de prescripción de las sanciones en los casos en los que el recurso de alzada interpuesto contra las mismas se desestima por silencio administrativo. Así, a tenor de lo establecido en el artículo 30.3 de esta ley, en el caso de desestimación presunta del recurso, el plazo de prescripción de la sanción comenzará a computarse desde el día siguiente a aquel en el que finalice el plazo legalmente previsto para la resolución de dicho recurso. Esta nueva regla sobre la prescripción lógicamente tiene que producir consecuencias sobre el régimen de ejecutividad de las sanciones, pues la ejecutividad de la sanción constituye el presupuesto de la prescripción de la misma. En este artículo se da cuenta de ambas novedades y se analiza el problema de su contradicción respecto de la jurisprudencia —del Tribunal constitucional y del Tribunal Supremo— sobre el silencio en vía de recurso y sus efectos (más bien, sus «no efectos») sobre la prescripción y la ejecutividad de las sanciones. ABSTRACT: The Act 40/2015 of the legal regime of the Public Sector has introduced a new rule on the calculation of the limitation period to be applied to sanctions in cases where hierarchichal appeal filed against them had been rejected by administrative silence. Thus, within the meaning of section 30.3 of this Act, in case of implied rejection of the appeal, the calculation of the limitation period of the sanction shall begin from the day following the deadline legally established to resolve that appeal. This new rule about the limitation period has logically to have consequences over the enforceability of sanctions, since enforceability of the sanction as such is a prerequisite for the limitation period of it. This article deals with both novelties and analyzes the problem of their contradiction with the case law —by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court— regarding the silence within the appeal and its effects (or rather lack of effects) about the limitation period and enforceability of sanctions.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document