JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATIONS: CONSTITUTIONAL JUSTICE VS ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54503/2953-8165-2024.3(2)-71Keywords:
administrative regulations, judicial review, constitutional justice, administrative justice, jurisdiction, executive powerAbstract
The main purpose of the article is to discuss two forms of judicial control over administrative regulation (constitutional and administrative justice) and identify the problems related to the distribution of functions between them.
The core of the research is the theoretical characterization of judicial review of administrative regulations and examination of Armenian practice. In particular, the article explains the essence and the features of administrative regulations and, on this basis, attempts to provide a scientifically grounded answer to the question of how their legality should be verified.
As a result of the research, the author’s approach to the separation of the mechanisms of constitutional and administrative justice during judicial control over administrative regulations is presented. It is stated that the legality of administrative regulations can be verified within the framework of constitutional justice only in case the protection of human rights has not been ensured by the mechanisms of administrative one. This includes cases where legality of administrative regulations is discussed regarding their compliance with constitutional requirements.
References
Administrative Court v Government. DCC-1438. (2019). Retrieved May 15, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/sdv-1438.pdf.
Baer, S. (2014). Reply by the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, 3rd Congress of the World Conference on Constitutional Justice “Constitutional Justice and Social Integration”. Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Belov, S. (2014). Neposredstvennoe Primenenie Sudami Konstitucii v Rossiyskoy Federacii (Direct Application by the Courts of the Constitution in the Russian Federation). State and Law, No. 1. 45-55.
Chelaru, E. (2017). On the Jurisdictional Control of the Acts of the Government of Romania. In R. Arnold and J. I. Martínez-Estay (Ed.), Rule of Law, Human Rights and Judicial Control of Power: Some Reflections from National and International Law. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, Vol. 61. Springer International Publishing.
Daab, U. H. (2009). Review of Administrative Decisions of Government by Administrative Courts and Tribunals. National Report for the Federal Administrative Court of Germany (Bundesverwaltungsgericht). Leipzig.
Danielyan, G., Ayvazyan, V. & Manasyan, A. (2015). Sahmanadrakan Barepokhumneri Hayecakargi Druytner yev Dranc Iracman Himnakan Ughutyunnery Hayastani Hanrapetutyunum (The Provisions of the Concept of Constitutional Reforms and the Main Directions of Their Implementation in the Republic of Armenia). Interparliamentary Assembly of Member Nations of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Yerevan: “Hayrapet”.
Deputies of the National Assembly v National Assembly. DCC-1142. (2014). Retrieved May 09, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/6346986a92298_sdv-1142.pdf.
EL-IN-AR LLC v Government. AC/11032/05/19. (2020). Retrieved May 12, 2024, from: https://www.datalex.am:443/?app=AppCaseSearch&case_id=38562071809941690.
Favoreu, L. (1989). Constitutional Review in Europe. In L. Henkin & A. Rosenthal (Ed.), Constitutionalism and Rights: The Influence of The United States Constitution Abroad. New York: Columbia University Press.
Gellhorn, W. & Byse, C. (1974). Administrative Law: Cases and Comments. Mineola, New York: The Foundation Press.
Greer, S. (1997). The Exceptions to Articles 8 to 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Human rights files No. 15. Council of Europe Publishing.
Haibach, G. (1997). Comitology: A Comparative Analysis of the Separation and Delegation of Legislative Powers. Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law. No. 4. 373-385.
Human Rights Defender v Government. DCC-1075. (2013). Retrieved May 05, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/6340235b3fc1e_sdv-1075.pdf.
Human Rights Defender v National Assembly and Government. DCC-1136. (2014). Retrieved May 09, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/63469828bc4f5_sdv-1136.pdf.
Human Rights Defender v National Assembly and Government. DCC-1360. (2017). Retrieved May 12, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/sdv-1360.pdf.
Human Rights Defender v National Assembly and Government. DCC-1436. (2018). Retrieved May 09, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/sdv-1436.pdf.
Human Rights Defender v National Assembly and Government. DCC-1442. (2019). Retrieved May 02, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/sdv-1442.pdf.
Human Rights Defender v National Assembly and Government. DCC-1592. (2021). Retrieved May 12, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/63da17b8708a7_sdv-1592.pdf.
Human Rights Defender v National Assembly and Government. DCC-966. (2011). Retrieved May 15, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/633fde2ccfe45_sdv-966.pdf.
President v National Assembly. DCC-1546. (2020). Retrieved May 05, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/sdv-1546.pdf.
Puto, E. (2016). Judicial Review of Administrative Normative Act. Limits of Courts Control on Political Decision Making. Academic Journal of Business, Administration, Law and Social Sciences. Vol. 2, No. 1. 9-22.
Rupp, H. (1969). Federal Constitutional Court in Germany: Scope of Its Jurisdiction and Procedure. Notre Dame Law Review. Vol. 44, Iss. 4. 548-559.
Schutze, R. (2011). ‘Delegated’ Legislation in the (New) European Union: A Constitutional Analysis. The Modern Law Review. Vol. 74, No. 5. 661-693.
Shmavonyan v National Assembly. DCC-780. (2008). Retrieved May 05, 2024, from: https://www.concourt.am/decision/decisions/633d5cee46d87_sdv-780.pdf.
Torosyan v Government. AC/7588/05/21. (2021). Retrieved May 05, 2024, from: https://www.datalex.am:443/?app=AppCaseSearch&case_id=38562071809962402.
Tovmasyan, H., Luchterhandt, O., Muradian, G., Poghosyan, V., Reimers, V., & Rubel, R. (2011). Hayastani Hanrapetutyan Yndhanur Varchakan Iravunq (General Administrative Law of the Republic of Armenia). Yerevan: “Bavigh”.
US Supreme Court. (1980). Industrial Union Department, AFL-CIO v American Petroleum Institute. 448 US 607. Retrieved May 12, 2024, from: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/448/607/.
US Supreme Court. (1989). Mistretta v United States. 488 US 361. Retrieved May 12, 2024, from: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/488/361/.
Voßkuhle, A. (2007). Grundwisen Ofentlikhes Rekht։ Der Grundsatz des Vorbehalts des Gesetz (Basic Knowledge - Public Law: The Principle of the Reservation of the Law). In: S. Emmenegger, S. Lorenz, T. Ronnau, A. Voßkuhle & M. Huber (Ed.), Juristische Schulung (JuS). (118-119).
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Karen ZARIKYAN (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
