english french german greek italian lithuanian russian serbian spanish
Haupt arrow newsitems arrow ECHR President Raimondi to EF on Discretionary Power: Decision-Making proces(Dialogue State-Citizen?

ECHR President Raimondi to EF on Discretionary Power: Decision-Making proces(Dialogue State-Citizen?

Geschrieben von ACM
Thursday, 25 January 2018

echr_pres_reply_to_agg_quest_eurofora_400


*Strasbourg/ECHR/Angelo Marcopolo/- Replying to an "Eurofora"s Question at the Annual Press Conference of ECHR, its experienced President, Guido Raimondi from Italy, explained that the PanEuropean Court of Strasbourg "is Developing" quite wide possibilities for Judicial Control of Public Authorities' Discretionary Power, in order to Prevent eventual Abuse vis a vis Citizens, inter alia, also by imposign the Respect of a Number of Rules, concerning the Decision-Making process of any Public Administration, (f.ex., Prior Information of affected Citizens, Contradictory Procedure, Sufficient and Correct Motivation of Decisions, etc), i.e. in a way quite similar to an elementary Dialogue between States and Citizens Before Taking Important Decisions which Affect their Lives and/or Society at large, as "Eurofora"s Wider Project and Views support since a long time.


Such ECHR's moves (that President Raimondi analyzed here in a Crystal-clear way) coincide also with Both relevant EU Developments, particularly since Lisbon Treaty, as well as with even more Recent COE's PanEuropean Legal Space's own developments, as "Eurofora" has already Highlighted recently, (See, f.ex.: http://www.eurofora.net/newsflashes/news/coeruleoflawchecklistandeuroforaproject.html, etc).


-----------------------------------------

agg_question_to_echr_press_conf_eurofora_400


- In our Question, "Eurofora" started by pointing at the Fact that : -"A Few Months ago, in Strasbourg, CoE's Parliamentary Assembly endorsed a Measure adopted by the Venice Commission, (supported also by the Congress of Local/Regional Authorities of Europe : CLRAE), which concerns a General Mechanism, for All (COE's 47) Member Countries, about the relations between Citizens and Public Authorities, in order to Prevent Risks of Abuse of Discretionary Power."


- "I.e. when a State can Decide Whatever they like, in the Substance of the matter, But has to Respect a Series of (Decision-Making Process') Rules, that we know also in Adminstrative Law : As, f.ex., to Inform the Persons involved, to Hear them Before it Decides, to present a Motivation that is Sufficient, (Legally and Factaully) Correct, etc", we explained in this regard.  

 

echr_president_reply_to_agg_question_400


 - "Obviously, it's Not Directly and Explicitly Linked with some ECHR Articles. But, according to your Experience, is there Something - or there Might be Something, Hopefully - inside the PanEuropean Mechanism for Human Rights, - as there are some Similar things in EU Law, after Lisbon Treaty (EIF : 2010) - which Could Develop, in the foreseable Future, a kind of Guarantee against Abuse of Discretionary Power ?", "Eurofora" asked ECHR President Raimondi.


----------------------------------

 

echr_presidents_reply_to_ag_quest_eurofora_400
 

 

- ECHR's President reacted Positively, as he said, - "On your Interesting Question, concerning (Public Authorities') Discretionary Power, and possible Control by our (PanEuropean) Court :"


- "This is an Interesting Question, especialy Because the Range of (Public) Administrative activities, and the Role of the State in the Social Life, Developed and Increased, across the board, in CoE's 47 Member States, in Recent Years", Raimondi observed from the outset.


 - "But we (ECHR) have Developed a quite Rich Jurisprudence on that Issue : "


 - Even if, as "You Know, UnLike of Article 47 of (EU's) Charter of Fundamental Rights, which Covers All sorts of Jurisdiction (i.e. also Administrators, and Not only Judges), Our (CoE's) corresponding Provision in the (PanEuropean) Convention (on Human Rights), i.e. Article 6, (which is) Providing Guarantees of "Fair Trial", does Not Apply to All Forms of Jurisdictional Proceedings".


 - "So, in order to Trigger the Protection of Article 6, you Need Either a writer Obligation of a Civil Rights, or an Accusation in Criminal matters. Of course, these 2 Noions are developed Autonomously by the Case-Law of ECHR",  (which, therefore, can have a Wider Scope of Action, if it wishes so : See Infra).


=> "In this connection, the activity of the Public Administration may Fall Within he Scope of Application of Article 6 : Either Because a Civil Right is at Stake , either because what is considered as an Administrative Action in the National Law, is considered, in the Autonomous Evaluation of ECHR, (Comp. Supra), as a <<Criminal Sanction>>, which Triggers the Protection of Article 6".


 - "Of course, it's a Delicate Question, Because we are confronted with the Theory of Separation of Powers. So, we (ECHR) Require that, when Article 6 Applies, the Judge has to have what we call "Full Jurisdiction". But this has to be understood with Caution, when it comes to the Control of Activities of the Public Administration", he warned. "Because of the (Constitutional) Principle of Separation of Powers".


 - "We (ECHR) have developed a Rich Jurisprudence on this : I'd say, the Most Important Case in this direction is "Sigma TV against Cyprus", that you may know", President Raimondi indicated.


 - "And there are a Number of Principles, which have been developed, in this connection : One of them, is, for instance, that, if the Judicial Body, which is called upon to Review judicially the Behavior of the Public Administration, has Not the Power to Assess the Facts, and canNot Rely on an Independent Assessment of the Facts, that is, for instance, a Problem, in the context of Article 6 !", he pointed out. "And this is one the Examples".


 - "So, the (ECHR's relevant) Jurisprudence is, Already, Rich, and it is Developing".


 - F.ex., "there is a Case which is Pending : Ramos Nunes v. Portugal", which will be Delivered in the Forhcoming Months, by the Court, and may provide some Further Clarification on that Issue", he Announced in fine.

 

+ As for a Comparison with the relevant EU Law, the presence of ECJ's President, Tomorrow in Strasbourg, at the Official Opening of the New Judicial Year of 2018, (on the occasion of which, is organized a Timely Seminaire focused on "the Authority of Judicial Power" : Comp. Supra), might be very Interesting, potentially, in this regard too. ECHR and ECJ have indeed, Recently developed a very close Cooperation, President Raimondi stressed earlier Today.

 

 

(../..)


-----------------------------------


EuroStars-Eureka

Statistics

Besucher: 27224519

Archive

Login Form





Daten merken

Passwort vergessen?
Noch keinen Account? Account anlegen

Syndicate

RSS 0.91
RSS 1.0
RSS 2.0
ATOM 0.3
OPML

Other Menu

cedh_press_conflistening_agg

ECHR's President to "EuroFora" on Journalists Gongadze and Adali murders : Principles must apply to all States, without discrimination.


+ ECHR's Statistics on Freedom of Expression (See below).


 European Court of Human Rights' President, Jean-Paul Costa, questioned by "EuroFora" on Journalists' murders, as in Gongadze and Adali's cases etc., strongly stressed all CoE Member States' obligation to make efficient Investigations to find and punish those responsible, and underlined that ECHR's case-law's principles must apply to all without any discrimination.

His call was clearly supported by various Top MEPs who denounced a risk of "Double Standards" if some Journalists' murders are investigated, while others don't.

To avoid such risks, CoE's Parliamentary Assembly adopted a Resolution, on the occasion of Ukranian Journalist Gongadze's murder, "stressing", as a matter of general Principle, "the importance it attaches to the safety of Journalists and political activists, especially those linked to opposition groups, in ALL member states of the CoE". All "crimes against journalists and political activists must be investigated ... as a matter of priority, without political interference".

Costa was replying to "EuroFora"s question on the fact that, after CoE's Committee of Ministers, also CoE's Assembly had just adopted a Resolution on Gongadze murder case, based on an ECHR's judgement of 2005, asking a full Investigation from Ukraine, who has found and condemned  in 10 years of jail 2 executants, but not yet the instigators.

While nothing similar was yet done for dissident Turkish Cypriot Kutlu Adali's murder, with 5 bullets shot at his head out of his Family's home in the territories of Cyprus occupied by Ankara's army, despite another ECHR's judgement of the same year 2005, and despite Turkey's claim that nobody was found among those responsible for the murder, and that there was nothing more to do..

In order to be credible and efficient, CoE's mechanisms shouldn't find a way to at least ask for full investigations of all Journalists' murders anywhere they might be committed, without exceptions ?

adali_gongadze


- "On the larger question that you raised, I'd like to say, since we are in a period of stock-taking on ECHR's 50 Years, that the Court's case-law developed certain concepts ....such as the Positive obligations of States, part of which are also the procedural obligations", started to reply ECHR's President.

 - "Whenever Journalists, Lawyers, Defenders of Human Rights, or even simple Citizens are murdered, the States are held responsible, not only if its their own security forces' agents who committed these murders, but also if they didn't make sufficiently substantial and efficient Investigations", he stressed.

- "I want to strongly underline that we (ECHR) have found in many cases numerous violations of Articles 2 and 3 against States, ....(about) murders or torture, ...because they didn't make enough Investigations in order to try to find and punish those responsible".

- "We (ECHR) do that vis-a-vis all 47 (CoE) Member States, without any discrimination".

"Naturally, the circumstances in each particular case may be differend, and we can't ommit to apply the rules of proof, or the rules of criminal procedure".

"But we try, by all means, to apply these principles of our case-law, to all States", he concluded.

imag0335_400


      Costa's call was strongly supported by several Top CoE MEPs, from various Political areas


- "To investigate the murder of one Journalist, and not of another, looks like Double Standards", denounced the President of EuroLeft Group in CoE's Assembly, Dutch MEP Tiny Cox.  

- "What is the reason ? Politics or specificity of a case ? Of course, if Cyprus and Turkey are involved, it's always a Political case"..

- "Murders of Journalists should always be fully investigated, because killing Journalists is not only killing persons, but also killing Free Press".  "We (CoE's Assembly) should do our outmost to help People who are working on Free Press and they are under threat or murdered".

Because for Free Politics, Free Press is a pre-requisitive : Parliamentarians  cannot  function without a Free Press. Not investigating, is not protecting ourselves".

So we should investigate all Journalists' murders : We are talking about Gongadze, about the Cypriot man (Adali), about the Journalist murdered in Moscow one week ago, etc", Cox concluded

- "CoE can' look at these cases differently. CoE can't wear Blinckers  !".
- "If the one is investigated, so has to be also the other. Why there wasn't full investigation ? Why's that ?", wondered British  Socialist MEP, Alan Meale.

- "A good idea" would be to "make a Motion for Resolution", and "join all Journalists' murders. Adali and Gongadze etc", said to "EuroFora" EU Parliament Political affairs Committee's President, Goran Lindbland, ChristianDemocrat MEP from Sweden.


(See also earlier News at "EuroFora" on similar issues).
-------------------------------

ECHR's Statistics on Freedom of Expression :


    Almost Half of condemnations by ECHR for violations of Freedom of Expression in 2008, concern Turkey : 20 out of a total of 48 for all CoE's Member States.

    Russia, Poland, France and Moldova were condemned only 3 times. Romania, Greece, Portugal, 2 times, and the other CoE Member States only 1 time, or none.
--------------------
    During the last Decade : 1998 - 2008, Turkey was condemned for violating Freedom of Expression in ..169 cases, while Austria only in 24.

    France and Moldova in 14 and 13, respectively, closely followed by Russia and Poland with 11 and 10, respectively. The rest of CoE Member States had less than ten condemnations.    
    

Polls

2009 EU Elections were won by Parties against Technocracy and Turkey's controversial EU bid, while the 1999-2004 Majority Abstention trend decelerated. What should be done in 2009-2014 ?

Resultate

SMF Recent Topics SA

Copyright (c) 2007-2009 EIW/SENAS - EuroFora.net. All rights reserved. ISSN 1969-6361.
Powered by Elxis - Open Source CMS.