The Challenges of the Implementation of Paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the Judicial System of the Republic of Macedonia

Zendeli, Emine

doi:10.5539/jpl.v6n2p193

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…), Pridruživanje Hrvatske Europskoj Uniji, Izazovi institucionalnih prilagodbi, volume 2, pp. 99-123, Republic of Macedonia: Zendeli, E. (2013). The Challenges of the Implementation of Paragraph of Article of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the Judicial System of the Republic of Macedonia.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Absence of an Oral Hearing in Administrative Disputes:

Rašić

2023

CEPAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The right to an oral hearing is an essential element of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. This is particularly emphasised in administrative procedures where the parties are in a hierarchical relationship. The absence of an oral hearing can significantly limit a party’s right to a fair trial. Therefore, this paper aims to explore the positive law and state of play in the Republic of Slovenia and the Republic of Croatia regarding the right to an oral hearing. The purpose of this paper is to analyse relevant legislation and case law with the goal of proposing future legislation that better aligns with effective legal protection.Design/Methodology/Approach: Desk research was conducted to analyse current legal solutions and case law using sociological research methods. These involved analysing domestic and international legal texts and reviewing the rules governing national administrative procedures in the countries included in the research, as well as against decisions of the European Court of Human Rights. In addition, the research used a combination of primary and secondary data sources.Findings: Administrative courts should prioritise procedural justice and equality of arms, even when there is no clear need for oral hearings, especially if one of the parties requests to appear before the court. To minimise damaging discretion, both parties should consent to relinquishing the right to an oral hearing, which should be mandatory by default.Academic contribution to the field: The primary contribution of this paper lies in its de lege ferenda suggestions regarding the right to an oral hearing, which could potentially enhance the protection of human rights in relation to a fair trial in both administrative disputes and administrative procedures.Originality/Value: This research is original as it presents a comparative analysis of administrative procedure and disputes in selected Member States. To the best of the author’s knowledge, no such comparative study has been conducted before. The findings of this research could have significant value as they highlight the need for improving procedural justice and equality of arms in ensuring a fair trial in administrative disputes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Absence of an Oral Hearing in Administrative Disputes:

Rašić

2023

CEPAR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Control constitucional en el mundo contemporáneo - Retrospectiva y prospectiva

Lustig

Weiler

2021

Díkaion

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nuestro propósito en este artículo es retomar, actualizar y revisar teóricamente Judicial Review in the Contemporary World, de Mauro Cappelletti, una obra que fue pionera en su tratamiento del control constitucional. El principal recurso cartográfico, en homenaje a Cappelletti, es la metáfora de la ola. Trazamos un mapa de tres olas globales de control constitucional dentro de un mismo orden constitucional, las cuales son secuenciales y están superpuestas geográficamente a nivel mundial. La primera ola es la serie de “revoluciones constitucionales” al interior de los ordenamientos jurídicos nacionales. La segunda ola es la aparición del derecho internacional como fuente de derecho superior que los tribunales utilizan en el ejercicio de su poder de control constitucional. La tercera ola es una respuesta y reacción a la primera y segunda olas: por un lado, el intento de los tribunales nacionales de suplir las lagunas democráticas e identitarias del Estado de derecho en el marco de la gobernanza transnacional (tener una voz). Por el otro, es el conjunto de casos en los que los tribunales (y los Estados) tratan de escapar de la primera o la segunda ola (el escape). La interacción entre las olas y sus características dialécticas constituyen el marco explicativo que ofrecemos en este artículo. Al destacar las relaciones dialécticas dentro de las olas y entre ellas, esperamos desafiar la narrativa dominante sobre los procesos de constitucionalización como algo progresivo y evolutivo.

show abstract

The Challenges of the Implementation of Paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms in the Judicial System of the Republic of Macedonia

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Absence of an Oral Hearing in Administrative Disputes:

Absence of an Oral Hearing in Administrative Disputes:

Control constitucional en el mundo contemporáneo - Retrospectiva y prospectiva

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About