Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  INTERNATIONAL JUDICIARY
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

ETICKÉ PRAVIDLÁ MEDZINÁRODNÝCH SÚDNYCH ORGÁNOV A TRIBUNÁLOV

100%
Klučka J.
Právny obzor. Teoretický časopis pre otázky štátu a práva (Juridical Review. Theoretical journal for the questions of state and law)
|
2017
|
vol. 100
|
issue 3
289 – 305
EN
This article deals with current situation relating to the regulation of ethical rules within international judiciary. Unlikely of the domestic judicairies having informal international network of judges capable elaborate a number of non-binding documents relating to the conduct of judges (Bangelore principles) the situation in international judiciary is different. Due to the lack of such network only Study Group of International Law Association attempted to prepare set of principles relating exclusively to the judicial ethic of the judges of international courts and tribunals (Burgh House Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary). Apart from four international tribunals so far adopted their own ethical codes namely – European Court of Justice (first Code of Conduct of 2007 replaced in 2016 by the new Code), European Court of Human Rights (Resolution on Judicial Ethic-2008), Caribbean Court of Justice (Code of Judicial Conduct) and International Criminal Court (Code of Judicial Ethics-2004). As a basic, all ethical codes emphasized the principles of independence and impartiality of international judges and to certain extent the deal also with the principles governing the external activities of judges and their conduct relating to the participants of judicial proceedings. The main difference among them concerns the existence and availability of the procedural mechanism allow to object the alleged violations of the ethical principles by the members of international courts.
2

VLÁDA PRÁVA V MEDZINÁRODNOM PRÁVE

86%
Klučka J.
Právny obzor. Teoretický časopis pre otázky štátu a práva (Juridical Review. Theoretical journal for the questions of state and law)
|
2012
|
vol. 95
|
issue 2
125 – 136
EN
The content of this article was presented at the 16th Annual Meeting of the Autumn School of Law “The Changes of the Rule of Law” organized by the Institution of State and Law of the Slovak Academy of Sciences (11.-19. november 2011 in Modra Harmonia).One of the most remarkable feature of the past century represents the process of the “gradual externalization” of the rule of law principles (originally rooted within the internal legal order of states) on the “higher” level of international legal order. This process has been accompanied by a number of problems due to particularities of international legal order and its differences (with the comparison of domestic legal orders of states).Despite this facts some concrete results of this process have been achieved and following segments of international rule of law are today generally recognized both in the practice of states and legal writing of international law. International normativity today represents dynamic segment of international rule of law with regard of the increasing scope of its regulation combined with specialization and the tendency of universality in more important topics of international law. In its entirety represents less or more detailed and/or efficient measure in order to exclude or at least to reduce the room for wilful (arbitrary) conduct of states and other subjects of international law. Principle of legal equality of states can be also observed within the segment of international normativity. Generally speaking its main purpose is to guarantee equal position of all states vis á vis the system of international law including the process of creation of its rules (both conventional and customary), process of its formal validity, the process of their practical application by equal and non discriminatory manner in relation to all state parties of valid international treaties etc. Unlike of domestic legal orders of states where the application of responsibility is regularly preceded by the decision (s) of independent judicial bodies the situation within the segment of international normativity is different. The principal reason of such difference consists in a lack of obligatory jurisdiction of international judicial bodies. There is a general consensus that the acceptation of obligatory jurisdiction of international courts would strengthen the role of rule of law especially in the sphere of so called secondary rules of international law and their enforceability.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.