2019冠状病毒病大流行期间根据《欧洲人权公约》第6条获得公平审判的权利:

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Central European Public Administration Review Pub Date : 2021-11-29 DOI:10.17573/cepar.2021.2.01
Andrzej Paduch
{"title":"2019冠状病毒病大流行期间根据《欧洲人权公约》第6条获得公平审判的权利:","authors":"Andrzej Paduch","doi":"10.17573/cepar.2021.2.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The aim of the study is to analyse the possibility of modifying procedural law in the context of the legislative measures taken in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic on the example of the Polish administrative judiciary system.Design/Methodology/Approach: The study employs the dogmatic-legal method, analysing the provisions of the ECHR and examples of the regulation of administrative court proceedings in Poland. The interpretation of the provisions is carried out taking into account the jurisprudence of the courts, in particular the jurisprudence of the ECtHR.Findings: The study shows that no regulation taking away the right to have the case heard in public is compliant with the ECHR. Public hearing is in fact a crucial aspect of the right to a fair trial. However, in order to mitigate the effects of a pandemic, states may introduce such solutions which – within the limits of art. 6 sec. 1 ECHR – modify the law.Academic contribution to the field: The study suggests theoretical and general solutions to the problem that arose during the COVID-19 pandemic: whether and how certain aspects of the right to a fair trial can be limited without violating its essence. The issue is analysed from the perspective of the administrative judiciary and legal solutions adopted in Poland, but the conclusions may also apply to the regulations of other European countries and even to the civil or criminal judiciary.Practical Implications: The paper presents the requirements provided in art. 6 sec. 1 ECHR in the context of restrictions of public hearing implemented to counteract the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. It may be a basis for further studies of the problem or for assessing the solutions adopted in the member states of the Council of Europe.Originality/Value: Publications concerning modifications to procedural law in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic are not numerous in scientific literature. Due to the lack of analyses, the paper will contribute to the development of literature. \n ","PeriodicalId":53802,"journal":{"name":"Central European Public Administration Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Right to a Fair Trial Under Article 6 ECHR During the Covid-19 Pandemic:\",\"authors\":\"Andrzej Paduch\",\"doi\":\"10.17573/cepar.2021.2.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose: The aim of the study is to analyse the possibility of modifying procedural law in the context of the legislative measures taken in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic on the example of the Polish administrative judiciary system.Design/Methodology/Approach: The study employs the dogmatic-legal method, analysing the provisions of the ECHR and examples of the regulation of administrative court proceedings in Poland. The interpretation of the provisions is carried out taking into account the jurisprudence of the courts, in particular the jurisprudence of the ECtHR.Findings: The study shows that no regulation taking away the right to have the case heard in public is compliant with the ECHR. Public hearing is in fact a crucial aspect of the right to a fair trial. However, in order to mitigate the effects of a pandemic, states may introduce such solutions which – within the limits of art. 6 sec. 1 ECHR – modify the law.Academic contribution to the field: The study suggests theoretical and general solutions to the problem that arose during the COVID-19 pandemic: whether and how certain aspects of the right to a fair trial can be limited without violating its essence. The issue is analysed from the perspective of the administrative judiciary and legal solutions adopted in Poland, but the conclusions may also apply to the regulations of other European countries and even to the civil or criminal judiciary.Practical Implications: The paper presents the requirements provided in art. 6 sec. 1 ECHR in the context of restrictions of public hearing implemented to counteract the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. It may be a basis for further studies of the problem or for assessing the solutions adopted in the member states of the Council of Europe.Originality/Value: Publications concerning modifications to procedural law in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic are not numerous in scientific literature. Due to the lack of analyses, the paper will contribute to the development of literature. \\n \",\"PeriodicalId\":53802,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Central European Public Administration Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Central European Public Administration Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2021.2.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central European Public Administration Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17573/cepar.2021.2.01","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是以波兰行政司法系统为例,分析在针对新冠肺炎疫情采取的立法措施背景下修改程序法的可能性。设计/方法/方法:该研究采用了教条主义的法律方法,分析了《欧洲人权公约》的条款和波兰行政法院程序监管的例子。对这些条款的解释考虑到了法院的判例,特别是欧洲人权法院的判例。调查结果:研究表明,没有任何剥夺公开审理案件权利的法规符合《欧洲人权公约》。事实上,公开听证是公平审判权的一个关键方面。然而,为了减轻疫情的影响,各州可以在《欧洲人权公约》第6条第1款的范围内引入此类解决方案来修改法律。该领域的学术贡献:该研究为新冠肺炎大流行期间出现的问题提出了理论和一般解决方案:公平审判权的某些方面是否以及如何在不违反其本质的情况下受到限制。从波兰的行政司法和法律解决方案的角度分析了这一问题,但结论也可能适用于其他欧洲国家的法规,甚至适用于民事或刑事司法。实际意义:本文介绍了《欧洲人权公约》第6条第1款在为遏制新冠肺炎疫情蔓延而实施的公开听证会限制的背景下提出的要求。它可能是进一步研究该问题或评估欧洲委员会成员国通过的解决方案的基础。起源/价值:关于在新冠肺炎大流行背景下修改程序法的出版物在科学文献中并不多。由于缺乏分析,本文将有助于文学的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Right to a Fair Trial Under Article 6 ECHR During the Covid-19 Pandemic:
Purpose: The aim of the study is to analyse the possibility of modifying procedural law in the context of the legislative measures taken in connection with the COVID-19 pandemic on the example of the Polish administrative judiciary system.Design/Methodology/Approach: The study employs the dogmatic-legal method, analysing the provisions of the ECHR and examples of the regulation of administrative court proceedings in Poland. The interpretation of the provisions is carried out taking into account the jurisprudence of the courts, in particular the jurisprudence of the ECtHR.Findings: The study shows that no regulation taking away the right to have the case heard in public is compliant with the ECHR. Public hearing is in fact a crucial aspect of the right to a fair trial. However, in order to mitigate the effects of a pandemic, states may introduce such solutions which – within the limits of art. 6 sec. 1 ECHR – modify the law.Academic contribution to the field: The study suggests theoretical and general solutions to the problem that arose during the COVID-19 pandemic: whether and how certain aspects of the right to a fair trial can be limited without violating its essence. The issue is analysed from the perspective of the administrative judiciary and legal solutions adopted in Poland, but the conclusions may also apply to the regulations of other European countries and even to the civil or criminal judiciary.Practical Implications: The paper presents the requirements provided in art. 6 sec. 1 ECHR in the context of restrictions of public hearing implemented to counteract the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. It may be a basis for further studies of the problem or for assessing the solutions adopted in the member states of the Council of Europe.Originality/Value: Publications concerning modifications to procedural law in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic are not numerous in scientific literature. Due to the lack of analyses, the paper will contribute to the development of literature.  
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
28.60%
发文量
7
期刊最新文献
Absence of an Oral Hearing in Administrative Disputes: Business’ Attitudes Towards Corruption in Selected Central European Countries Selflessness: An International Comparative Analysis of a Much-Needed Public Value Does Context Matter? Governance Models in Local Administration Trends in the Digitalisation of Public Administrations – in Light of EU Legislation and Domestic Developments
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1