Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NA Must Be Respondent In The CC

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NA Must Be Respondent In The CC

    NA MUST BE RESPONDENT IN THE CC
    Anna Israelian

    Aravot.am
    31 Aug 06

    Chairman of the Constitutional Court Gagik Haroutiunian considers
    this version more reasonable.

    It is known that the first personal application the CC decided
    to examine was Artak Zeinalian's. Why was the examination of that
    application appointed in November?

    We haven't started any examination in August as the NA was on holiday
    and our courts as well. The law provides 9 months for the examination
    of that case.

    NA chairman Tigran Torosian informed during the latest press
    conference that the CC had recognized the NA respondent for 7 cases
    about constitutionality of laws and predicted that number of such
    packages could be added. Na chairman didn't know whether the NA would
    be respondent for all that kind of cases or the government also must
    be respondent in the CC. What is your opinion?

    First of all they shouldn't worry about the quantity of
    applications. We should examine how it is displayed in
    other countries. For example in Germany, 2-3% of personal
    applications include issues of constitutionality and become point of
    examination. Such applications are 3-5% in Czechia and Slovakia, 5-8%
    in Russia. 10-11 from 112 applications is about constitutionality
    in Armenia, that is 9-10%. First of all we must examine why that
    percent is so high. I connect it with the accumulated problems,
    first of all: CC didn't have that power before, the citizen wasn't
    able to turn and a lot of issues have been accumulated. Only 10%
    of our personal applications contents problems of constitutionality,
    and NA different commissions have connection with those issues.

    And if each commission once in three months is able to be respondent at
    the CC, nothing strange will happen. Irrespective of the fact how the
    law will be changed, will it remain the same or won't, Constitutional
    Court make the final decree in every country for recognizing the
    respondent side. The law can't determine, this is the respondent
    side. As every case has its specificity and the court must decide
    who must answer.

    You think the NA must be respondent in the CC but the NA chairman
    thinks that problem may be impossible to solve in the framework of
    NA committees.

    Na thinks there aren't enough powers to provide for applications. The
    parliament itself decides who will represent in the CC, and they
    can send only three persons. That can be either the chief of the
    commission, deputy chief or its member, or a certain advocate. The
    problem is to choose the right way. The president of the country and
    the parliament in Russia and many other countries have their permanent
    representatives in the CC during the examination of all cases as the
    examination of each case deal with the public authority. When the
    NA tries to find any solution, it must think how to improve further
    legislative activities.
Working...
X