Judicial control of the effectiveness of activities related to public administration

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (10) ◽  
pp. 29-44
Author(s):  
Jacek Jaśkiewicz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Administration ◽  
Procedural Fairness ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Administrative Proceedings ◽  
Court Proceeding ◽  
Legal Procedures

Legal procedures in Europe must comply with the principles of procedural fairness. These rules include a set of conditions ensuring real, fast and effective consideration of the case in accordance with guarantees stipulated under Article 6 and Article 13 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights, taken by jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. The article presents the characteristics of Polish court proceeding in the scope of enforcing the effectiveness of public administration activities in the light of these requirements. Legal remedies to prevent tardiness of administration actions as well as discipline efficiency and speed of national administrative proceedings within this system were also discussed.

scholarly journals The Reopening of Proceedings After the Judgment of the ECtHR in Cases Against Lithuania

Teisė ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 113 ◽  
pp. 27-49
Author(s):  
Nika Bruskina
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Administrative Courts ◽  
Administrative Proceedings

The author of this article examines the case law of the Lithuanian courts of general jurisdiction and administrative courts related to the reopening of domestic criminal, civil, or administrative proceedings when the European Court of Human Rights (hereinafter – the ECtHR or the Court) finds a violation of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and/or Protocols in the cases against Lithuania.

The right to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuliya Samovich
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Educational Organizations ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
The Right ◽  
Judicial Protection

The manual is devoted to making individual complaints to the European Court of human rights: peculiarities of realization of the right to appeal, conditions of admissibility and the judicial procedure of the European Court of Human Rights. The author analyses some “autonomous concepts” used in the court's case law and touches upon the possibility of limiting the right to judicial protection. The article deals with the formation and development of the individual's rights to international judicial protection, as well as the protection of human rights in universal quasi-judicial international bodies and regional judicial institutions of the European Union and the Organization of American States. This publication includes a material containing an analysis of recent changes in the legal regulation of the Institute of individual complaints. The manual is recommended for students of educational organizations of higher education, studying in the areas of bachelor's and master's degree “Jurisprudence”.

Rola uzasadnienia sądowego w realizacji prawa do rzetelnego procesu sądowoadministracyjnego– standard strasburski

2014 ◽  
pp. 13-31
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Grzelak-Bach
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Order ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Judicial Proceedings ◽  
Court Proceedings ◽  
Basic Level

Following a brief introduction of article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the author begins by analyzing case law from the European Court of Human Rights regarding the legal reasoning in judicial proceedings. The main premise of this paper is to present a formula for preparing legal reasoning in administrative court proceedings. The author draws attention to the role of judges who, in the process of adjudication, should apply creative interpretation of the rules of law, when they see errors or omissions in legislative provisions, or blatant violations of the European legal order. The conclusion of those deliberations finds, that the process of tailoring the approach to meet Strasbourg’s requirements should, on a basic level, be at the discretion of judges rather than the legislators.

Battles Over Symbols: The “Religion” of the Minority Versus the “Culture” of the Majority

2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lori G. Beaman
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Religious Freedom ◽  
Religious Symbol ◽  
Anti Semitism ◽  
European Tradition ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Grand Chamber ◽  
The Right

Moreover, with the benefit of hindsight, it is easy to identify in the constant central core of Christian faith, despite the inquisition, despite anti-Semitism and despite the crusades, the principles of human dignity, tolerance and freedom, including religious freedom, and therefore, in the last analysis, the foundations of the secular State.A European court should not be called upon to bankrupt centuries of European tradition. No court, certainly not this Court, should rob the Italians of part of their cultural personality.In March, 2011, after five years of working its way through various levels of national and European courts, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights decided that a crucifix hanging at the front of a classroom did not violate the right to religious freedom under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Specifically, Ms. Soile Lautsi had complained that the presence of the crucifix violated her and her children's right to religious freedom and that its presence amounted to an enforced religious regime. The Grand Chamber, reversing the lower Chamber's decision, held that while admittedly a religious symbol, the crucifix also represented the cultural heritage of Italians.

The Strasbourg Court on the Dayton Constitution: Judgment in the case of Sejdić and Finci v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, 22 December 2009

2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 309-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samo Bardutzky
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
European Court ◽  
Fundamental Freedoms ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Grand Chamber

On 22 December 2009, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (hereafter: the Court) issued a judgment on the applications filed by two citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Mr Dervo Sejdić and Mr Jakob Finci. It found a violation of their rights under the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and under the Protocols to the Convention. Bosnia and Herzegovina had violated the applicants' rights under Article 14 of the Convention in conjunction with Article 3 of Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and under Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

scholarly journals Improving Human Rights Protection on the national and the European Level

2015 ◽  
pp. 36-51
Author(s):  
RUDOLF DUR SCHNUTZ
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Level ◽  
European Level ◽  
Human Rights Protection ◽  
Current State ◽  
European Court ◽  
Protection Of Human Rights ◽  
Venice Commission ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Individual

The recent move towards the individual access to constitutional justice is a progress for protection of human rights in Europe. The explicit purpose of these efforts is to settle human rights issues on the national level and to reduce the number of cases at the Strasbourg Court. Such individual complaints have to be designed in a way that makes them an effective remedy which has to be exhausted before a case can be brought before the European Court of Human Rights. This paper points out the current state of these improvements on the national level in a difficult context on the European level and the recommendations of the Venice Commission in this regard.

scholarly journals Exercising the right to a trial in a reasonable time in the Republic of Serbia

2007 ◽  
Vol 79 (9) ◽  
pp. 311-333
Author(s):  
Maja Omeragić-Pantić ◽  
Biljana Vujičić ◽  
Bojan Tubić ◽  
Rodoljub Etinski
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Current Status ◽  
National Strategy ◽  
Reasonable Time ◽  
Legal Remedies ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Judicial Procedure ◽  
The Right

Constitution and procedural laws explicitly guarantee right to a trial in a reasonable time. The procedural laws have been changed and some new solutions, which have to enable a trial in a reasonable time, were adopted. The Decision on establishing of national strategy of judicature reform was adopted, in order to make the judicature more efficient. However, the inquiries show that there are still some significant disadvantages which affect the right to a trial in a reasonable time. Despite the new legislative solutions, adopted in order to accelerate the trials, some of these solutions are not completely sufficient or their implementation in practice is not entirely adequate. The Decision on establishing of national strategy of judicature reform sets up the right analysis of the current status, as well as "therapy for the healing" of judicature. However, it seems that current measures are not in accordance with this therapy. Technical modernization of the courts is very slow and personal capacities, on the level of the associates, is declining instead of getting stronger. The biggest disadvantage of the present legal system, regarding the right to a trial in a reasonable time is the absence of the efficient legal remedies with which the party could accelerate the judicial procedure, respectively with which it could give damages caused by the breach of this right. This paper shows how strict are the criteria of the European court of human rights in Strasbourg related to it and that the existing legal remedies in our legal system are not sufficient to meet these demands. The confirmation of this conclusion came from Strasbourg, when this paper was already written, in the judgment V.A.M. v. Serbia of March 13, 2007.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document