European Court of Human Rights, French administrative law, right to fair trial, reasonable time, effective remedy, good administration of justice, administrative justice, ECHR Article 6, ECHR Article 13
Reader
Abstract
Extract
of 4
Abstract
This document discusses the right to be judged within a reasonable time, a fundamental right in the service of good administration of justice, resulting from the dialogue between the French administrative judge and the European Court of Human Rights.
Extract
[...] At the European level, the right to be judged within a reasonable time participates in the right to an effective remedy. Article 6 paragraph 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights retains among the elements of a fair trial the right of applicants to have their case treated within a 'reasonable time'. In a democratic society, the rule of law, the right to a fair trial, and the right to an effective remedy, the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights impose the guarantee of the right to a judge, the right to an independent and impartial judge, the right to an effective remedy, and the right to redress in the event of malfunctioning of justice. [...]
[...] It is, in addition, provided that the head of the permanent mission of the administrative jurisdictions may make recommendations to the presidents of the concerned jurisdictions when situations are criticizable (article R. 112-3, CJA). II- The right to be tried within a reasonable time, a guarantee of the effectiveness of administrative justice A right in the service of good administration of justice Definition of good administration of justice. A high-quality administrative justice that depends on the speed of responding in general to citizens. The reduction of the objective judgment delay has been more or less achieved. Statistics: delay reduced by 31% between 2008 and 2018 before the CE . [...]
[...] The apprehension of the right to be judged within a reasonable time passes through the study of its repercussions in French administrative contentious proceedings. Thus, to what extent would the right to be judged within a reasonable time be a right in the service of the litigant and contributing to a quality justice? The right to be judged within a reasonable time is, on the one hand, the fruit of the dialogue between the administrative judge and the European Court of Human Rights and, on the other hand, the guarantee of an effective administrative justice (II). [...]
[...] The collaboration between the French high courts and the European Court of Human Rights On the one hand, the position adopted in Magiera It was all the more imperative given the European Court of Human Rights' signs of impatience. Condemnation of a violation of Article 6 paragraph 1 estimating that, due to the requirement of a serious fault, no favorable decision for the litigant had intervened in 30 years (ECHR March 2002, Lutz v. France). Magiera will receive the blessing of the ECHR: ECHR October 2003, and since then the French litigant can address both the French judge and the European judge. [...]
[...] France was thus condemned several times. Based on Article 13, the ECHR Court, combining this article with Article paragraph estimates in in the judgment Kudla v. Poland of 26 October 2000 that 'the right to an effective remedy obliges States to organise an internal remedy allowing the individual to obtain redress for the damage caused by the failure to respect a reasonable time-limit'. It is noted that there has been a reversal in 25 years of administrative case law on the malfunctioning of the justice of irresponsibility to gross negligence (CE December 1978, Darmont) and finally to simple fault: CE June 2002, Magiera which recalls that 'litigants have the right to have their request judged within a reasonable time frame'. [...]
