ARM-2010-2-002
a) Armenia / b) Constitutional Court / c) / d) 13-04-2010 / e) DCC-873 / f) On the conformity with the Constitution of Articles 118 and 118.6 of the Code of Administrative Procedure / g) To be published in Tegekagir (Official Gazette) / h) .
Keywords of the Systematic Thesaurus:
|
Institutions - Judicial bodies - Procedure. |
|
|
Institutions - Judicial bodies - Administrative courts. |
|
|
Fundamental Rights - Civil and political rights - Procedural safeguards, rights of the defence and fair trial - Scope - Litigious administrative proceedings. |
|
|
Fundamental Rights - Civil and political rights - Procedural safeguards, rights of the defence and fair trial - Effective remedy. |
|
|
Fundamental Rights - Civil and political rights - Procedural safeguards, rights of the defence and fair trial - Access to courts. |
Keywords of the alphabetical index:
Administrative court, control / Appeal procedure / Appeal in cassation, non-admission / Admissibility, conditions.
Headnotes:
If the legislator deemed it necessary to establish in Armenia a specialist Administrative Court with one judicial instance and provided that appeals against acts of the Administrative Court could only be filed with the Court of Cassation, the integrity and efficiency of the appeal system, including the specific aspects of the admissibility of the cassation appeals and the trial on merits, should be guaranteed in accordance with those institutional solutions.
The institutional status of the Cassation Court cannot prejudice the full and complete implementation of its power.
Summary:
An individual complainant asked the Constitutional Court to assess the issue of the constitutionality of Articles 118 and 118.6 of the Code of Administrative Procedure. The complainant suggested that these provisions were out of line with Articles 18 and 19 of the Constitution, due to incomplete provision for access to the Cassation Court, and its efficiency, within the two-instance administrative procedural system.
The Constitutional Court observed that Points 1 and 2 of the First Part of the disputed Article 18.6 of the Code of Administrative Procedure provided for legal regulations, which are inherent to the three-instance civil procedural system, while in determination of the admissibility requirements of the cassation appeals within the two-instance administrative justice system, the guarantees of accessibility of the Cassation Court and of the realisation of the right to effective appeal should prevail. The institutional status of the Cassation Court as the highest body within the system of general jurisdiction courts cannot prejudice the full and complete implementation of its power vested by the law, as well as the effective realisation of the right to appeal to the Cassation Court. If the legislator deemed it necessary to establish in Armenia a specialist Administrative Court with one judicial instance and provided that appeals against acts of the Administrative Court could only be filed with the Court of Cassation, the integrity and efficiency of the appeal system, including the specific aspects of the admissibility of the cassation appeals and the trial on merits, should be guaranteed in accordance with those institutional solutions.
The Constitutional Court stated that the provisions under challenge could not provide for such admissibility requirements for the cassation appeal, and this could impinge upon the realisation of the right to appeal. The requirements could not be justified by the status of the Court of Cassation.
Article 118.6 provided as one of the requirements for the admissibility of a cassation appeal the existence of a breach of material or procedural law, resulting in the incorrect resolution of the case. The Constitutional Court assessed this requirement within the interpretation given in law-enforcement practice and held that the establishment of the fact that judicial error has resulted in the incorrect resolution of a case does not concern as such the admissibility requirement of an appeal and cannot be stipulated within the Code of Administrative Procedure as an admissibility requirement. The establishment of such a fact may take place at trial stage, in compliance with all the requirements of justice. The Cassation Court does not have the power to assess the existence of this type of judicial error at the stage of the admissibility of the cassation appeal, as the determination of this issue at the admissibility stage predetermines the outcome of the trial.
The Constitutional Court held that the legislation did not ensure the completeness of the institution of appeal against Administrative Court acts.
Languages:
Armenian.