| Popis: |
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. Namen: Namen članka je preučiti možnost sprememb procesnega prava v luči zakonodajnih ukrepov, sprejetih v zvezi s pandemijo covida-19, na primeru poljskega sistema upravnega sodstva. Zasnova/Metodologija/Pristop: Članek uporablja pravno dogmatično metodo, analizira določbe EKČP in primere ureditve upravnih sodnih postopkov na Poljskem. Določbe so razložene ob upoštevanju sodne prakse sodišč, zlasti ESČP. Ugotovitve: Študija kaže, da noben predpis, ki odvzema pravico do javne obravnave primera, ni v skladu z EKČP. Javna obravnava je pravzaprav ključni vidik pravice do poštenega sojenja. Za ublažitev posledic pandemije pa lahko države uvedejo tudi rešitve, s katerimi, v mejah prvega odstavka 6. člena EKČP, svoje zakone spremenijo. Akademski prispevek k znanstvenem področju: Študija ponuja teoretične in splošne rešitve vprašanja, ki se je pojavilo med pandemijo covida-19: ali in kako je mogoče določene vidike pravice do poštenega sojenja omejiti, ne da bi pri tem kršili njeno bistvo. Vprašanje je analizirano z vidika upravno-sodnih in zakonskih rešitev, sprejetih na Poljskem, vendar so ugotovitve lahko uporabne tudi za ureditve v drugih evropskih državah in celo za civilno ali kazensko sodstvo. Vpliv v praksi: V članku so predstavljene zahteve iz prvega odstavka 6. člena EKČP v kontekstu omejitev javne obravnave z namenom preprečevanja širjenja pandemije covida-19. Služi lahko tudi kot osnova za nadaljnje študije problema ali za presojo rešitev, sprejetih v državah članicah Sveta Evrope. Izvirnost/Vrednost: Publikacij o spremembah procesnega prava zaradi pandemije covida-19 v znanstveni literaturi ni veliko. Zaradi siceršnjega pomanjkanja analiz bo prispevek nedvomno prispeval k razvoju znanstvene literature. |
