The principle of effectiveness against the background of the principle of the right to a fair trial in the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights

Katarzyna Kułak-Krzysiak

doi:10.25167/osap.5207

Published: 2024-07-17

Vol. 22 No. 1 (2024)

The principle of effectiveness against the background of the principle of the right to a fair trial in the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights

Katarzyna Kułak-Krzysiak

The Opole Studies in Administration and Law

Section: Articles

https://doi.org/10.25167/osap.5207

Abstract

The European Court of Human Rights (Hereinafter referred to as ECtHR) has jurisdiction over 47 countries and it is considered to be one of the most effective mechanisms
for the protection of human rights in the world. In Recommendation Rec(2004)20 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe of 15 December 2004 on judicial review of administrative acts – with reference to the right to an effective remedy provided for in Article 13 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) – the principle of effectiveness is primarily identified. The guarantees provided by the norms of national law and confirmed in the norms of international law allow citizens to appeal to international tribunals in pursuit of claims alleging violation of rights. Violation of the principle of effectiveness results in the infringement of one or more rights guaranteed by national and also international law. This paper aims to
determine what the effectiveness of proceedings is according to the norms of international law and how it is interpreted in relation to the principle of the right to a fair trial. This article aims to define what the effectiveness of proceedings is according to the norms of international law and how it is interpreted in relation to the principle of the right to a fair trial. The research goal of this article is to analyze the legal provisions regarding the effectiveness of court proceedings. The article will ask whether the judicial process can be effective? What is the efficiency of judicial proceedings? What features must the judicial proceedings meet to have the characteristics of efficiency? What activities are being undertaken by international authorities to increase the efficiency of the judicial process, and do
these activities have an impact on solving the problem? The issue of efficiency of judicial proceedings is very important. Hence the attempt to answer the questions above.
The article presents the genesis of the institution of efficiency and its evolution in recent years as well as attempts to compare it over the years.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Katarzyna Kułak-Krzysiak, Mediation as an instrument to achieve goals in court-administrative and administrative proceedings , The Opole Studies in Administration and Law: Vol. 17 No. 1 (2019)
Katarzyna Kułak-Krzysiak, The costs of enforcement activities in administrative proceedings before administrative authority – unnamed tax? , The Opole Studies in Administration and Law: Vol. 18 No. 1 (2020)
Katarzyna KUŁAK-KRZYSIAK, The concept of extended producer responsibility – the example of a deposit-return system , The Opole Studies in Administration and Law: Vol. 19 No. 2 (2021)

Download files

pdf (Język Polski)

Citation rules

Kułak-Krzysiak, K. (2024). The principle of effectiveness against the background of the principle of the right to a fair trial in the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights. The Opole Studies in Administration and Law, 22(1), 55–69. https://doi.org/10.25167/osap.5207

Cited by / Share

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

References

European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) (Journal of Laws of 1993, No. 61, item 284, as amended).
Google Scholar

Protocol No. 11 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms concerning the transformation of the control mechanism established by the Convention, drawn up in Strasbourg on 11 May 1994 (Journal of Laws of 1998, No.
Google Scholar

, item 962).
Google Scholar

Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Act of 17 March 1921 (Journal of Laws No. 44, item 267; No.79, No. 101, item 935.
Google Scholar

Act of 17 June 2004 on complaints against the violation of a party’s right to have their case heard in pre-trial proceedings conducted or supervised by a prosecutor and in court proceedings without undue delay (Journal of Laws 2023.1725 consolidated text).
Google Scholar

Government statement of 7 April 1993 on the declaration of recognition of the competence of the European Commission of Human Rights and the jurisdiction of the European
Google Scholar

Court of Human Rights (Journal of Law No. 61, item 286).
Google Scholar

Postanowienie SN z dnia 11 stycznia 1995 III ARN 75/94, OSNAPiUS 1995, nr 9, poz. 106.
Google Scholar

Judgement of 15 January 2002, Application no. 43779/98, Lex Polonica no. 385176, Judgement available at www.ms.gov.pl/re/maczynski.doc.
Google Scholar

Application no. 28616/95, Judgement of 30 October 1998.
Google Scholar

Application no. 27916/95, Judgement of 30 October 1998.
Google Scholar

Application no. 26614/95, Judgement of 15 October 1999.
Google Scholar

Application no. 35577/97, Judgement of 24 February 2004.
Google Scholar

Application no. 53698, Judgement of 3 June 2003, LexPolonica no. 385388.
Google Scholar

Application no. 49349/99, Judgement of 27 May 2003, LexPolonica no. 385387.
Google Scholar

Application no. 6232/73, Judgement of 28 June 1978, LexPolonica no. 402823.
Google Scholar

Application no. 41187/02.
Google Scholar

Application no. 35382/97, Uoti v. Finland, Judgement of 9 January 2007.
Google Scholar

Application no. 61222/00.
Google Scholar

Application no. 8812/02.
Google Scholar

Bajorek-Ziaja, Hanna. 2010. Skarga do Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka oraz skarga do Europejskiego Trybunału Sprawiedliwości. Warszawa: LexisNexis, 2nd edition
Google Scholar

Banaszak, Bogusław. 1997. Prawo obywateli do występowania ze skargami i wnioskami.
Google Scholar

Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Sejmowe.
Google Scholar

Bisztyga, Andrzej. 1997. Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka. Katowice: Górnośląska Wyższa Szkoła Handlowa.
Google Scholar

Bonelli, Matteo. 2019. Effective Judicial Protection in EU Law: an Evolving Principle of a Constitutional Nature. Review of European Administrative Law 12(2): 35–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7590/187479819X15840066091240
Google Scholar

Cichoń, Zbigniew. 2005. Orzekanie przez Europejski Trybunał Praw Człowieka zadośćuczynienie w razie stwierdzenia naruszenia przez państwo Europejskiej Konwencji Praw Człowieka (art. 41 EKPCz). Palestra 7/8: 177–180.
Google Scholar

Chlebny, Jacek. 2010. Standardy Rady Europy i Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka w procedurze administracyjnej. In: Postępowanie administracyjne w Europie, (ed.) Z. Kmieciak, Warszawa, p. 34 et seq.
Google Scholar

Cour Europenne des droits de L.Homme European Court Of Human Rights, September 2003, A report issued by the President of the European Court of Human Rights, The European Court of Human Rights: Historical Background, Organisation and Procedure.
Google Scholar

Ereciński, Tadeusz, 2010. Skarga na przewlekłość postępowania na mocy „Ustawy o skardze na naruszenie prawa strony do rozpoznania sprawy w postępowaniu sądowym bez nieuzasadnionej zwłoki” a dostęp do Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka. In: Dostęp
Google Scholar

obywateli do europejskiego wymiaru sprawiedliwości, eds. H. Izdebski, H. Machińska,
Google Scholar

Information Office of the Council of Europe. Wydawnictwo Biuro Informacji Rady Europy.
Google Scholar

Gonera, Katarzyna. 2005. Przewlekłość postępowania w sprawach cywilnych. Monitor Sądowy 11/12: 8–16.
Google Scholar

Kamiński, Marcin. 2019. Efektywność kontroli sądowoadministracyjnej rozstrzygnięć wydawanych w procedurach administracyjnych trzeciej generacji. Rozważania na tle wybranych rozwiązań normatywnych w prawie polskim. Opolskie Studia Administracyjno- DOI: https://doi.org/10.25167/osap.1500
Google Scholar

-Prawne 17(1): 141–151.
Google Scholar

Kmieciak, Zbigniew (ed.). 2006. Polskie sądownictwo administracyjne. Warszawa: C.H. Beck.
Google Scholar

Kolarz, Stefania. 2021. Reforma Europejskiego Trybunału Praw Człowieka, available at: https://www.pism.pl/publikacje/reforma-europejskiego-trybunalu-praw-czlowieka, Polski Instytut Spraw Międzynarodowych.
Google Scholar

Leszczyński, Leszek. 2003. O usprawnieniu postępowania przed sądami administracyjnymi (kilka uwag w związku z reformą). In: Polski model sądownictwa administracyjnego, eds. J. Stelmasiak, J. Niczyporuk, S. Fundowicz, Lublin.
Google Scholar

Leszczyński, Leszek, Bartosz Liżewski. 2008. Ochrona praw człowieka w Europie. Szkic zagadnień podstawowych. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Verba.
Google Scholar

Mik, Cezary. 1992. Porządek międzynarodowy a porządek krajowy w dziedzinie praw człowieka. Państwo i Prawo 11: 6 i nast.
Google Scholar

Nowicki, Marek, Antoni. 1997. Rzetelny proces rozsądnym terminie w prawie europejskim. Studia Europejskie 2: 49–70.
Google Scholar

Mendez-Pinedo, Elvira. 2021. The principle of effectiveness of EU law: a difficult concept in legal scholarship, Juridical Tribune (Tribuna Juridica). Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies (Law Department) 11(1): 5–29.
Google Scholar

Piątek, Wojciech. 2019. The right to an effective remedy in European law: significance, content and interaction. China-EU Law Journal 6: 163–174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12689-019-00086-3
Google Scholar

Rozakis, Christos. 2006. The Right to a Fair Trial in Civil Cases: Article 6 Para. 1 of the ECHR. Id-Dritt XIX: 115–125.
Google Scholar

Statystyki ETPCz – https://www.gov.pl/web/sprawiedliwosc/statystyki-europejskiego-trybunalu-praw-czlowieka-w-2019-roku. Last accessed: 25.07.2023.
Google Scholar

Stelmach, Jerzy. 2023. Efektywne prawo, available at chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibp-cajpcglclefindmkaj/https://ruj.uj.edu.pl/xmlui/bitstream/handle/item/79004/stelmach_efektywne_prawo_2010.pdf p. 958-966. Last accessed: 09.07.2023.
Google Scholar