DOCSLIB.ORG

Science and Technique of Democracy, No. 44 CDL-STD(2007)044 Engl

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Science and Technique of Democracy, No. 44 CDL-STD(2007)044 Engl Science and technique of democracy, No. 44 CDL-STD(2007)044 Engl. only EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW CAN EXCESSIVE LENGTH OF PROCEEDINGS BE REMEDIED? TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section I 3 Report on the effectiveness of national remedies in respect of excessive length of proceedings 3 I. Introduction 4 II. The scope and aims of the present study 4 III. The right to an effective remedy before a national authority in respect of the unreasonable duration of proceedings: the international guarantee 6 A. The right to a hearing within a reasonable time: what is at stake 6 B. The reasonableness requirement in Article 6 of the Convention: an outline 7 C.The right to an effective remedy before a national authority under Article 13: an outline 8 D. The relationship between Article 6 § 1 and Article 13 of the Convention 10 IV. The supervision by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe in respect of the implementation of length-of-proceedings cases 11 V. Existing domestic remedies in respect of allegedly lengthy proceedings in the Council of Europe member States: a comparative survey 13 A. In general 13 B. State of Art 15 1. Remedies available for civil/administrative proceedings 15 2. Remedies available for criminal proceedings 17 VI. The assessment of the existing national remedies by the European Court of Human Rights 19 A. In general 19 B. Remedies available for civil/administrative proceedings 20 C. Remedies available for criminal proceedings 24 VII. The requirements of Article 13 of the Convention in respect of unreasonably lengthy proceedings according to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights 26 A. As regards the kind of remedy 26 B. As regards the legal basis for the remedy and its clarity/accessibility 28 C. As regards the general characteristics of the remedial procedure 29 VIII. The Venice Commission’s proposals concerning the effectiveness of domestic remedies in respect of excessive length of proceedings 31 A. As concerns the kind of remedy 31 B.As concerns whether or not the compensatory remedies for the excessive length of proceedings should be specific 33 C. As concerns the form of the remedies 33 D. As concerns the various remedies 33 1. Civil and administrative proceedings 33 2. Criminal proceedings 36 IX. Main Conclusions 39 Section II 40 Questionnaire and Replies 40 Questionnaire ..............................................................................................................................40 Albania........................................................................................................................................42 Andorra .......................................................................................................................................45 Armenia.......................................................................................................................................49 Austria.........................................................................................................................................51 Azerbaijan...................................................................................................................................55 Belgium.......................................................................................................................................57 Bosnia and Herzegovina .............................................................................................................71 Bulgaria.......................................................................................................................................73 Croatia.........................................................................................................................................75 Cyprus.........................................................................................................................................85 Czech Republic ...........................................................................................................................89 Denmark......................................................................................................................................93 Estonia.........................................................................................................................................97 Finland ......................................................................................................................................101 France........................................................................................................................................103 Georgia......................................................................................................................................105 Germany....................................................................................................................................109 Greece .......................................................................................................................................111 Hungary.....................................................................................................................................113 Iceland.......................................................................................................................................117 Ireland .......................................................................................................................................125 Italy ...........................................................................................................................................133 Latvia ........................................................................................................................................137 Licehtenstein.............................................................................................................................141 Lithuania ...................................................................................................................................149 Luxembourg..............................................................................................................................155 Malta .........................................................................................................................................157 Moldova ....................................................................................................................................159 Monaco .....................................................................................................................................163 Montenegro...............................................................................................................................165 Netherlands ...............................................................................................................................167 Norway......................................................................................................................................173 Poland........................................................................................................................................177 Portugal .....................................................................................................................................181 Romania ....................................................................................................................................183 Russian Federation....................................................................................................................189 San Marino................................................................................................................................193 Serbia ........................................................................................................................................195 Slovakia.....................................................................................................................................199 Slovenia.....................................................................................................................................203 Spain..........................................................................................................................................207 Sweden......................................................................................................................................211 Switzerland................................................................................................................................213 “The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia”......................................................................215 Turkey.......................................................................................................................................219 Ukraine......................................................................................................................................221 United Kingdom .......................................................................................................................225 Section III 231 Reports presented at the Conference on “Remedies for unduly lengthy proceedings: a new approach to the obligations of Council of Europe Member States” (Bucharest, 3 April 2006) 231 Welcome Speech Mr Mihai-Răzvan Ungureanu...................................................................................................232 Welcome
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bosnia and Herzegovina Joint Opinion on the Legal
    Strasbourg, Warsaw, 9 December 2019 CDL-AD(2019)026 Opinion No. 951/2019 Or. Engl. ODIHR Opinion Nr.:FoA-BiH/360/2019 EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) OSCE OFFICE FOR DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS (OSCE/ODIHR) BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA JOINT OPINION ON THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK GOVERNING THE FREEDOM OF PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA, IN ITS TWO ENTITIES AND IN BRČKO DISTRICT Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 121st Plenary Session (Venice, 6-7 December 2019) On the basis of comments by Ms Claire BAZY-MALAURIE (Member, France) Mr Paolo CAROZZA (Member, United States of America) Mr Nicolae ESANU (Substitute member, Moldova) Mr Jean-Claude SCHOLSEM (substitute member, Belgium) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2019)026 - 2 - Table of Contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 3 II. Background and Scope of the Opinion ...................................................................... 4 III. International Standards .............................................................................................. 5 IV. Legal context and legislative competence .................................................................. 6 V. Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 8 A. Definitions of public assembly ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Federation Interim Opinion on Constitutional
    Strasbourg, 23 March 2021 CDL-AD(2021)005 Opinion No. 992/2020 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) RUSSIAN FEDERATION INTERIM OPINION ON CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS AND THE PROCEDURE FOR THEIR ADOPTION Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 126th Plenary Session (online, 19-20 March 2021) on the basis of comments by Mr Nicos ALIVIZATOS (Member, Greece) Ms Claire BAZY MALAURIE (Member, France) Ms Veronika BÍLKOVÁ (Member, Czech Republic) Mr Iain CAMERON (Member, Sweden) Ms Monika HERMANNS (Substitute Member, Germany) Mr Martin KUIJER (Substitute Member, Netherlands) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2021)005 - 2 - Contents I. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 3 II. Scope of the present opinion .......................................................................................... 4 III. Chronology of the preparation and adoption of the constitutional amendments ............. 4 IV. Analysis of the procedure for the Adoption of the Constitutional Amendments .............. 6 A. Speed of preparation of the amendments - consultations ........................................... 6 B. Competence of the Constitutional Court ..................................................................... 7 C. Competence of the Constitutional Assembly .............................................................. 7 D. Ad hoc procedure .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Slovakia Request by the President Pertaining to The
    Strasbourg, 21 February 2017 CDL-REF(2017)008 Opinion No. 877 / 2017 Engl. only EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) SLOVAKIA REQUEST BY THE PRESIDENT PERTAINING TO THE APPOINTMENT OF JUDGES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT WITH REASONING FOR THE QUESTIONS ASKED AND ATTACHMENTS This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int SLOVAK REPUBLIC RULING of the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic PL. ÚS 4/2012 -77 On October 24, 2012, the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic, in the Plenary consisting of its President Ms. Ivetta Macejková and Judges Ján Auxt, Peter Brňák, Ľubomír Dobrík, Ľudmila Gajdošíková, Juraj Horváth, Sergej Kohut, Ján Luby, Milan Ľalík, Lajos Mészáros, Marianna Mochnáčová, Ladislav Orosz and Rudolf Tkáčik deliberated in a closed session the petition from a group of Members of National Council of the Slovak Republic (MPs), represented by R. P. (MP), seeking interpretation of Article 102 para. 1 (t) and Article 150 of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic and renders the following Interpretation: President of the Slovak Republic has a duty to deal with the proposal of the National Council of the Slovak Republic to appoint the Prosecutor General of the Slovak Republic pursuant to Article 150 of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic and, where the latter has been elected in a procedure in accordance with law, to either appoint the nominated candidate within a reasonable period of time, or inform the National Council of the Slovak Republic
    [Show full text]
  • Medals, Orders and Decorations
    Medals, Orders and Decorations To be sold by auction at: Sotheby’s, in the Upper Grosvenor Gallery The Aeolian Hall, Bloomfield Place New Bond Street London W1A 2AA Day of Sale: Wednesday 26 November 2014 at 10.30am and 2.00pm Public viewing: 45 Maddox Street, London W1S 2PE Monday 24 November 10.00 am to 4.30 pm Tuesday 25 November 10.00 am to 4.30 pm Or by previous appointment. Catalogue no. 71 Price £15 Enquiries: James Morton, Paul Wood or Stephen Lloyd Cover illustrations: Lot 421 (front); lot 86 (back); lot 453 (inside front); lot 583 (inside back) Tel.: +44 (0)20 7493 5344 Fax: +44 (0)20 7495 6325 Email: [email protected] Website: www.mortonandeden.com This auction is conducted by Morton & Eden Ltd. in accordance with our Conditions of Business printed at the back of this catalogue. All questions and comments relating to the operation of this sale or to its content should be addressed to Morton & Eden Ltd. and not to Sotheby’s. Online Bidding This auction can be viewed online at www.the-saleroom.com and www.invaluable.com. Morton & Eden Ltd offers an online bidding service via www.the-saleroom.com. This is provided on the under- standing that Morton & Eden Ltd shall not be responsible for errors or failures to execute internet bids for reasons including but not limited to: i) a loss of internet connection by either party; ii) a breakdown or other problems with the online bidding software; iii) a breakdown or other problems with your computer, system or internet connec- tion.
    [Show full text]
  • Venice Commission)
    Strasbourg, 16 April 2020 CDL-PI(2020)003 Engl. only EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) COMPILATION OF VENICE COMMISSION OPINIONS AND REPORTS ON STATES OF EMERGENCY 2 CDL-PI(2020)003 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 3 I. BENCHMARKS ............................................................................................................. 4 II. Declaration of state of emergency: definition and substantive requirements ......... 5 III. Derogation from human rights obligations .............................................................. 10 IV. Constitutional entrenchment of the state of emergency ......................................... 12 V. Declaration of state of emergency: competences ................................................... 14 VI. Oversight of the declaration and prolongation of the state of emergency ............ 14 a. Parliamentary oversight ......................................................................................... 14 b. Judicial review ........................................................................................................ 18 VII. Duration of the state of emergency .......................................................................... 21 VIII. Duration of the emergency measures ...................................................................... 22 IX Scope of the emergency measures .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines on Political Party Regulation 2Nd Edition
    Strasbourg, 14 December 2020 CDL-AD(2020)032 Study No. 881/2017 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) OSCE OFFICE FOR DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS (OSCE/ODIHR) GUIDELINES ON POLITICAL PARTY REGULATION 2ND EDITION Approved by the Council of Democratic Elections at its 69th online meeting (7 October 2020) and Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 125th online Plenary Session (11-12 December 2020) on the basis of comments by OSCE/ODIHR Core Group of Experts on Political Parties Mr Josep Maria CASTELLA ANDREU (Member, Spain) Mr Pieter van DIJK (Expert, Former Member, the Netherlands) Mr Nicolae ESANU (Substitute Member, Republic of Moldova) Mr Ben VERMEULEN (Member, the Netherlands) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2020)032 - 2 - Table of contents I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 5 II. POLITICAL PARTIES: THEIR IMPORTANCE, FUNCTIONS AND REGULATION ............ 7 1. The classification and importance of political parties and their functions ........................ 7 2. Three dimensions ........................................................................................................... 8 3. Two models ..................................................................................................................... 9 III. PRINCIPLES ...................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Opinion on the Fourth Amendment to The
    Strasbourg, 17 June 2013 CDL-AD(2013)012 Opinion 720 / 2013 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) OPINION ON THE FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF HUNGARY Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 95th Plenary Session (Venice, 14-15 June 2013) on the basis of comments by Mr Christoph GRABENWARTER (Member, Austria) Mr Wolfgang HOFFMANN-RIEM (Member, Germany) Ms Hanna SUCHOCKA (Member, Poland) Mr Kaarlo TUORI (Member, Finland) Mr Jan VELAERS (Member, Belgium) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2013)012 - 2 - Table of contents I. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 3 II. Preliminary remarks ...................................................................................................... 3 III. Amendments to the Chapters “Foundation” and “Freedom and Responsibility” of the Fundamental Law ................................................................................................................. 6 A. The protection of marriage and family (Article 1) ....................................................... 6 B. Communist past (Article 3) ........................................................................................ 6 C. The recognition of churches (Article 4) ...................................................................... 8 D. Media access for political parties (Article 5.1) .........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • CDL-AD(2005)041 Opinion No
    Strasbourg, 19 Decembre 2005 CDL-AD(2005)041 Opinion no. 343 / 2005 Or.Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) OPINION ON THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE EXISTING LEGISLATION IN MONTENEGRO CONCERNING THE ORGANISATION OF REFERENDUMS WITH APPLICABLE INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 65th Plenary Session, (Venice, 16-17 December 2005) on the basis of comments by Mr Anthony BRADLEY (Substitute Member, United Kingdom) Mr Carlos CLOSA MONTERO (Member, Spain) Mr Kaarlo TUORI (Member, Finland) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. Ce document ne sera pas distribué en réunion. Prière de vous munir de cet exemplaire. - 2 - CDL-AD(2005)041 Table of Contents Page I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................3 II. A PREREQUISITE: RESPECT FOR GOOD PRACTICE IN ELECTORAL MATTERS.5 III. REQUIRED LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION AND MAJORITY REQUIREMENTS.....7 IV. CRITERIA FOR ELIGIBILITY TO VOTE......................................................................11 V. CONCLUSIONS .....................................................................................................................16 - 3 - CDL-AD(2005)041 I. INTRODUCTION 1. On 27 May 2005, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe requested an opinion of the Venice Commission on the compatibility with applicable international standards of the existing legislation in Montenegro concerning the organisation of referendums, with a special focus on the issues of required turnout, majority and the criteria for the eligibility to vote. 2. This request refers to the plan of the Montenegrin authorities to organise a referendum on the independence of the country. At present, on the basis of the Constitutional Charter, which entered into force on 4 February 2003, Montenegro is a member state of the State Union of Serbia and Montenegro.
    [Show full text]
  • Hungary Opinion on Act Xxv of 4 April 2017 on The
    Strasbourg, 9 October 2017 CDL-AD(2017)022 Opinion 891 / 2017 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) HUNGARY OPINION ON ACT XXV OF 4 APRIL 2017 ON THE AMENDMENT OF ACT CCIV OF 2011 ON NATIONAL TERTIARY EDUCATION Endorsed by the Venice Commission at its 111th Plenary Session (Venice, 6-7 October 2017) on the basis of comments by: Ms R. KIENER (Member, Switzerland) Mr B. VERMEULEN (Member, The Netherlands) Mr D. FARRINGTON (Expert, DGII, Council of Europe) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int 2 CDL-AD(2017)022 CONTENT I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 3 II. PRELIMINARY REMARKS ........................................................................................... 3 A. Background .............................................................................................................. 3 1. Constitutional and legal framework ......................................................................... 3 2. Act XXV of 2017 amending the 2011 HEA .............................................................. 6 a. New requirements for foreign universities ............................................................ 6 b. Scope of application ............................................................................................ 7 B. Scope of the Opinion ............................................................................................. 11 C.
    [Show full text]
  • Opinion on the Draft Law on The
    Strasbourg, 20 June 2011 CDL-AD(2011)019 Opinion No. 624 / 2011 Or. Engl. EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) OPINION ON THE DRAFT LAW ON THE COUNCIL FOR THE SELECTION OF JUDGES OF KYRGYZSTAN Adopted by the Venice Commission at its 87 th Plenary Session (Venice, 17-18 June 2011) on the basis of comments by Mr Nicolae ESANU (Member, Moldova) Mr Latif HÜSEYNOV (Member, Azerbaijan) This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL-AD(2011)019 - 2 - I. Introduction 1. By a letter of 5 April 2011, Ms Galina Skripkina, Chairperson of the Committee on Constitutional Legislation, State Structure, Legality and Local Self-Governance of the Parliament of Kyrgyzstan (Jogorku Kenesh), has made a request for an opinion on the following three draft Laws: - “the draft Constitutional Law on the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court” (subject of Opinion 622/2011); - “the draft Constitutional Law on the introduction of changes to the Constitutional Law on the Status of Judges” (subject of Opinion 623/2011); - “the draft Law on the Council for the Selection of Judges” (hereinafter the “draft Law”, subject to the present opinion). 2. As part of a judicial reform package, the Parliament of Kyrgyzstan had also prepared two other draft Laws (on Judicial Self-Government and on the Supreme Court and Local Courts), which were, however, not submitted to the Venice Commission for opinion due to the very short deadlines and the heavy workload of the Venice Commission in preparing the first three opinions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of the Second Chamber in European States
    Strasbourg, 1 March/1er mars 2006 CDL(2006)011 Or. Bil. Study No. 335/2005 EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) COMMISSION EUROPEENNE POUR LA DEMOCRATIE PAR LE DROIT (COMMISSION DE VENISE) THE ROLE OF THE SECOND CHAMBER IN EUROPEAN STATES LE ROLE DE LA DEUXIEME CHAMBRE DANS LES ETATS EUROPEENS CONTRIBUTIONS BY VENICE COMMISSION MEMBERS CONTRIBUTIONS DES MEMBRES DE LA COMMISSION DE VENISE This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. Ce document ne sera pas distribué en réunion. Prière de vous munir de cet exemplaire. CDL(2006)011 - 2 - TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE DES MATIERES Page THE SECOND CHAMBERS OF PARLIAMENT, by Christoph Grabenwarter, Constitutional Court, Vienna, Substitute Member, Austria......................................................................................3 LE SENAT DE BELGIQUE, par Jean-Claude Scholsem, Université de Liège, Membre, Belgique ..............................................................................................................................................7 ROLE OF THE SECOND HOUSE OF THE PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA, by Cazim Sadikovic, University of Sarajevo, Member, Bosnia and Herzegovina......................................................................................................................................12 THE ROLE OF THE SECOND CHAMBER IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC: THE SENATE OF THE PARLIAMENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC, by Eliska Wagnerova, Constitutional Court, Brno, Member, Czech Republic...........................................................................................16
    [Show full text]
  • The Founding Fathers of the EU the European Union Explained
    THE EUROPEAN UNION EXPLAINED The founding fathers of the EU THE EUROPEAN UNION EXPLAINED This publication is a part of a series that explains what the EU does in different policy areas, why the EU is involved and what the results are. You can see online which ones are available and download them at: http://europa.eu/pol/index_en.htm How the EU works Europe 2020: Europe’s growth strategy The founding fathers of the EU Agriculture Borders and security Budget Climate action Competition Consumers Culture and audiovisual The European Union explained: Customs The founding fathers of the EU Development and cooperation Digital agenda European Commission Economic and monetary union and the euro Directorate-General for Communication Education, training, youth and sport Publications Employment and social affairs 1049 Brussels Energy BELGIUM Enlargement Enterprise Manuscript completed in May 2012 Environment Fight against fraud Photos on cover and page 2: © EU 2013- Corbis Fisheries and maritime affairs Food safety 2013 — pp. 28 — 21 x 29.7 cm Foreign affairs and and security policy ISBN 978-92-79-28695-7 Humanitarian aid doi:10.2775/98747 Internal market Justice, citizenship, fundamental rights Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, Migration and asylum 2013 Public health Regional policy © European Union, 2013 Research and innovation Reproduction is authorised. For any use or reproduction Taxation of individual photos, permission must be sought directly Trade from the copyright holders. Transport THE founding fathers OF THE EU The founding fathers of the EU Over half a century ago a number of visionary fathers were a diverse group of people who held leaders inspired the creation of the European the same ideals: a peaceful, united and Union we live in today.
    [Show full text]