scholarly journals Constitutional principles in public administrator's decision-making under the case law of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 109-115
Author(s):  
Ieva Deviatnikovaitė
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Family Names ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
The Republic

This paper serves few purposes. First, it examines the principles of public administration in Lithuania. Good administration principle is analysed as constitutional principle relying on the case law of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania. Second, it explores impact of the decisions of Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania to the contemporary judicial review of Lithuanian administrative courts. Therefore, one of the latest rulings of the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania related to the spelling of names and family names in the passports of citizens of the Republic of Lithuania will be reviewed.

scholarly journals Sądowa kontrola decyzji organów podatkowych w sprawach ulg w spłacie zobowiązań podatkowych opartych na uznaniu administracyjnym

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 441
Author(s):  
Andrzej Niezgoda
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Administrative Discretion ◽  
The Public ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Tax Relief ◽  
The Law ◽  
Administrative Courts

<p>The article is of a scientific-research nature. The author discusses the problem of limits of judicial review of discretionary decisions made by taxation authorities, which aim at applying relief in payments of tax liabilities under Polish regulations and case-law of administrative courts. It may be noted that despite the issue of administrative discretion being discussed in the academic literature, the question of limits of judicial review in the practice of administrative courts still raises doubts. It is therefore reasonable to undertake the analysis of the main views formulated in the literature and the case-law of administrative courts addressing this problem, from the point of view of the limits of judicial review of discretionary decisions. The thesis of the article is that the nature of discretionary decisions on relief in payment of tax liabilities, determined by the function of administrative discretion, and, at the same time, the criteria set out in the law for judicial review of public administration, limit the role of the administrative court in examining the compliance with procedural law of the tax proceedings preceding the issuance of such a decision and the respecting by tax authorities of the fundamental values of the system of law expressed in the Polish Constitution. This is because they define the limits of administrative discretion, within which the choice of one of the possible solutions remains beyond the judicial review of the public administration. For the law, as it stands (<em>de lege lata</em>) there are no grounds for administrative courts, provided that the tax authorities respect the basic values of the legal system expressed in the Polish Constitution, to formulate assessments as to the circumstances and reasons justifying the granting or refusal to grant a tax relief, or its scope. The concept of internal and external limits of administrative discretion may therefore be useful for administrative court rulings.</p>

scholarly journals Judical review of discretionary powers in the activity of historical monuments protection bodies. The experience under the case law of Polish administrative courts

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 6-29
Author(s):  
Jerzy Parchomiuk
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The Body ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
The Public ◽  
Historical Monuments ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Discretionary Powers

The sovereign nature of the forms of operation of cultural heritage protection authorities, the polarization between the individual interest and the public interest, discretion margin in the activities of the authorities, all these elements create a kind of “explosive mixture”, which is the source of the legal disputes between the owners of historical monuments and historical monuments protection bodies. The key element of the guarantee of individual freedom is judicial review of public administration. Therefore, it is a matter of dispute to which extent the public administration is subject to judicial review when performing the tasks entrusted. The aim of this article is to analyze how Polish administrative courts approach the problem. What methodology of the review of discretion margin they use? How they solve the dilemma: who makes the final decision – the body or the court? Do they retain the judicial self-restraint or rather they are willing to interfere in the merits of the decision?

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

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.

Rule of law and the scope of interpretation of legislative provisions in the process of judicial and administrative review. Remarks against the background of the phenomenon of „lawmaking” of administrative courts

2021 ◽  
Vol 2(24) ◽  
pp. 373-387
Author(s):  
Przemysław Wilczyński
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal System ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Basic Criterion ◽  
Administrative Review ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Insight Into

The rule of law, as stipulated in article 7 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, is one of the fundamental principles shaping the functioning of public administration in the Republic of Poland. Legality of the functioning of public administration is also accepted as the basic criterion of judicial and administrative review of the actions taken by the administration. However, judgments of administrative courts often go outside the boundaries of findings that could be made based on linguistic interpretation of legislative provisions, by referring to the rules of the legal system, including in cases where no doubts exist with regards to the interpretation of provisions. The aim of this paper is to offer insight into the basis and nature of doubts encountered with regards to the admissibility of the use of non-linguistic interpretation by administrative courts where the use of such interpretation does not appear to be required.

scholarly journals Hukum Internasional sebagai Alat Interpretasi dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 73
Author(s):  
Umbu Rauta ◽  
Ninon Melatyugra
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Constitutional Tradition ◽  
The Relationship

Tulisan ini ingin menjawab dua isu utama mengenai hubungan hukum internasional dan pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi RI (MKRI). Isu pertama adalah legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai alat interpretasi dalam pengujian undang-undang, sedangkan isu kedua adalah urgensi penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MKRI. Tulisan ini merupakan penelitian hukum yang menggunakan pendekatan konseptual dan pendekatan historis dalam menjelaskan perkembangan pengujian undang-undang di Indonesia sekaligus menemukan legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional oleh MK RI. Kesimpulan dari tulisan ini menegaskan bahwa hukum internasional memiliki sumbangsih yang penting dalam perannya sebagai alat interpretasi dalam proses pengujian undang-undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi, khususnya terkait hak asasi manusia. Justifikasi keabsahan praktik penggunaan hukum internasional tersebut ditarik dari tradisi ketatanegaraan yang secara implisit dikehendaki UUD NRI Tahun 1945. Manfaat positif yang diberikan hukum internasional nyatanya harus disertai juga dengan penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK RI supaya hukum internasional dapat digunakan secara tepat. Pembahasan dalam tulisan ini dibagi ke dalam empat sub bahasan inti yakni, pengujian undang-undang, penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang oleh MK, legitimasi penggunaan hukum internasional sebagai the interpretative tool dalam pengujian undang-undang, pentingnya penguasaan hukum internasional oleh hakim MK.This article intentionally answers two principal issues regarding the relationship between international law and judicial review by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The first issue is the legitimacy of international use as an interpretative tool in judicial review. The second issue talks about the necessity of urgent international law mastery by the Constitutional Court’s judges. This legal research utilizes both a conceptual approach and a historical approach to explain the development of judicial review in Indonesia, and to find legitimacy of international law by the Constitutional Court. The analysis in this article affirms that international law positively contributes as an interpretative tool in judicial review by the Constitutional Court, particularly pertaining to human rights. A justification of a legitimate international law use is withdrawn from constitutional tradition which is implicitly desired by the Indonesian Constitution (UUD NRI 1945). Since international law has provided better insights into norms, a mastery of international law should be encouraged. There are four main discussions in this article: judicial review, application of international law in judicial review process, legitimacy of international law application in judicial review, and the importance of international law mastering by Constitutional Court judges.

scholarly journals The Position of Constitutional Complaint in the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-78
Author(s):  
Agsel Awanisa ◽  
Yusdianto Yusdianto ◽  
Siti Khoiriah
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
South Korea ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Case Number

The purpose of this research is to determine the constitutional complaint mechanism based on comparisons in other countries, practices, and adaptation of constitutional complaints under the authority of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. Many cases with constitutional complaint substance have been submitted to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia even though they don’t have this authority. This research uses a normative legal research method using a statutory approach, a conceptual approach, a comparative approach, and a case approach. This research indicates that the constitutional complaint mechanism in Germany, South Korea, and South Africa has been well implemented. In practice, cases with constitutional complaint substance are filed to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia by changing the form by using the legal means of a judicial review, such as case number 16/PUU-VI/ 2008, case number 140/PUU-XIII/2015 and case number 102/PUU-VII/2009. Due to the consideration of the structure, substance, and culture of law, adaptation of constitutional complaint within the authority of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia needs to be carried out by amending Law Number 24 of 2003 jo. Law Number 7 of 2020 concerning the Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals KEWENANGAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI REPUBLIK INDONESIA DALAM PEMBENTUKAN NORMA BARU (SUATU KAJIAN TERHADAP PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 21/PUU-XII/2014 JO PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 46/PUU-XIV/2016)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 474
Author(s):  
Elisabet . ◽  
Cut Memi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Legal Norm ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Criminal Sanctions ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

One of the authorities of the Constitutional Court governed by the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 was the examining of laws against the contitution or judicial review. Inside the regulations which governing the implementation of this authority, the Constitutional Court only acts as a negative legislator, namely canceling or reinforcing a norm tested by the Petitioner. But in practice, the Constitutional Court has changed its role to become a positive legislator, who is forming a new legal norm, which is the authority of legislators. The Constitutional Court should not be able to form a new legal norm because there is no legal basis which regulate that. But Constitutional Court can form a new legal norm in some urgent circumstances, relating to Human Rights, and preventing legal vacuum. In addition, the establishment of laws by lawmakers that require a long process and time. This is compelling Constitutional Court to make substitute norm before the law was established by the legislators. In the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 46/PUU-XVI/2016, the Court actually wants to establish a new legal norm, but because the articles in the petitioned have criminal sanctions, and if the Constitutional Court approves the petition, the Constitutional Court has formulated a new criminal act that can only be formed by the lawmaker. Whereas in the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 21/PUU-XII/2014, the Constitutional Court established a new norm because in the article a quo there were no criminal sanctions.

Directions of development of administrative courts’ jurisprudence in real property cases in 2020: Selected Aspects (Part I)

2021 ◽  
Vol I (I) ◽  
pp. 109-133
Author(s):  
Anna Dalkowska ◽  
Karol Rzęsiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Capital City ◽  
Official Journal ◽  
Real Property ◽  
Judicial Decisions ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

Jurisprudence of administrative courts on various aspects of real property law is extensive and multi- faceted. The main bulk of cases concerns real properties which are subject to the reprivatisation process that, in the absence of final solutions to re-privatisation predicaments and the multi-faceted effects of the Decree of 26 October 1945 on the Ownership and Use of Land Within the Boundaries of the Capital City of Warszawa, hereinafter referred to as the “Warsaw Decree” (promulgated in the official journal “Dziennik Ustaw” of 21 November 1945, No 50, item 279), which remains in force for over seventy years, are often the subject of judicial review of administrative decisions. Administrative court rulings play a significant role in real property cases and set the directions for future decisions by public administration bodies. The analysis of judicial rulings in real property cases will be limited to selected problems, which, given differing interpretations, are the cause of discrepancies in judicial decisions in administrative courts. This paper, which is the first part of the study, covers jurisprudence on the premise of death of a party during administrative proceedings, which has an impact on the potential invalidity of a decision and its ex tunc effects as well as the status of a party in real property proceedings.

Administrative Courts as Judicial Authorities

De Jure ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Svetla Yankulova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
The Republic

The present article is a research on the administrative jurisdictions according to Bulgarian legislation. It analyses the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria, the practice of the Constitutional Court and the current legislation. The juridical features are pointed out and the need for such juridical bodies is discussed.

Internal review systems and administrative justice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Mullen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Administrative Organization ◽  
Initial Decision ◽  
Internal Review ◽  
Administrative Justice

Internal review is a process whereby an administrative organization reconsiders its own decisions. The rationales typically offered for internal review are that it provides a means of challenging administrative decisions which is more accessible, quicker, and more cost-effective than external remedies such as appeals to tribunal and judicial review, and encourages improvement in the quality of initial decision-making in public administration. This chapter reviews the use made of internal review and evaluates the performance of several existing systems of internal review, concluding that they have failed to deliver the benefits claimed for them. Possible reasons for this failure are discussed and suggestions made as to what is required for internal review systems to achieve the aims to providing effective remedies for bad decisions and to contributing to improving initial decision-making.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document