ISSUES ON THE MODEL OF FORMATION OF THE SUPREME COURT TO BE STUDIED Studies show that Estonia is one of the European countries where the Supreme Court is fully provided with the jurisdiction of both cassation and constitutional review. In particular, as a result of the studies, the following main characteristics have been highlighted: From the perspective of structure, there are four chambers, including the Constitutional Review Chamber, which is composed of judges from the other three chambers, in some cases, a special commission is being set up as well. Involvement of judicial panel and expert (secretary) in the process of resolving the issue of accepting complaints; The possibility to conduct the examination of complaints mainly in a written form, in some cases possi bility of oral hearings as well; Scope of review, that is, the possibility of examining dispute settlement cases over rights within the factual circumstances established by the lower courts; Possibility of examination of cases by the whole judicial panel (en banc) in special cases envisaged by law; Powers of the Supreme Court; Possibility of constitutional review on the basis of individual and lower courts applications, as well as in cases where the special commission has reasonable doubts about the compliance of the legal norm to be applied with the Constitution. However, to get a complete picture of the Estonian model and to develop a conceptual model, it is necessary to obtain additional information on certain issues. And so: 1) At what stage of the proceedings an application could be submitted to the Supreme Court to determine the compliance of the legal norm with the Constitution? 2) Who can apply to the Supreme Court with this issue? 3) If the Supreme Court decides to initiate proceedings, examine and determine the compliance of the issue with the Constitution, whether the proceedings are being suspended in the relevant court. 4) What are the powers of the Supreme Court when acting as a reviewing court? 5) What are the powers of the Supreme Court when acting as a body reviewing the compliance with the Constitution? 6) When are the cases heard by three judges and when by the whole judicial panel? 7) When are the cases heard orally, are there any criteria that the Supreme Court should consider when making a decision on this issue? 8) What kind of judicial acts does the Supreme Court make when dealing with the issue of accepting (initiating proceedings, returning, rejecting, leaving without examination) cases? What kind of judicial acts does the Supreme Court make as a result of examination of cases (decisions, conclusions, etc.) and what legal consequences do they have? Can the same application raise the issues of both cassation and constitutional review, if so, how it is determined which Chamber should review the application and what judicial act is being issued as a result. In such cases, does the court assess the compliance with the Constitution and ensure the equal application of the law? If the case is pending before one of the chambers and the application on constitutional review is submitted, how this issue is being resolved, which chamber shall continue the examination of the case? What are the grounds for initiating proceedings if an appeal is filed against the decision for cassation review. What kind of particularities are envisaged in case of rejection of an application? When it comes to the appointment of the judges are there any special requirements to determine their specialization, what are the criteria for this issue. Are there other requirements for the candidates for judges of the Supreme Court in cases when the constitutional chamber of the court is being composed of judges from other chambers? In which cases is the Chamber entitled to change the legal positions expressed in earlier decisions? Is the Court authorized to exercise preliminary constitutional control? Can the Court ex officio decide to hear the case in terms of the compliance with the Constitution if the application for appeal of act has been submitted and vice versa. How does the Court exercise other constitutional oversight functions that are not related to litigating the fact of compliance with the Constitution. How is the issue of the specialization of the judges organized/ensured in the chambers of the Court? Is there any problem regarding specialization of judges when the case is to be examined jointly by the judges of several chambers for instance when a judge for criminal cases should hear a case on compliance with the Constitution How is the Supreme Court formed, who proposes and appoints the judges, what are the requirements for them? How is the issue of taking disciplinary measures against the judges of the Supreme Court examined and resolved, are these issues being examined by the members of different chambers or by the panel of judges.
Saatja: Embassy of the Republic of Armenia to Lithuania
<
[email protected]>
Saadetud: 05.08.2020 11:29
Adressaat: JM info Shared MB <
[email protected]>
Teema: [VÄLJAST] Note verbale 069-2020
Manused: Note verbale 069-2020.pdf; Estonia_questions_eng.docx
Dear Sir/Madam,
Please find attached the note verbale 069-2020 of the Embassy of Armenia
requesting the request in transmitting the attached list of questions
requested by the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia to the
Supreme Court of Estonia as well as in establishing a working
relationship between the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Armenia
and the Supreme Court of the Republic of Estonia.
The original of the letter will be sent via post.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Sincerely yours,
Misak Balayan,
Third secretary of the Embassy of Armenia,
Embassy of the Republic of Armenia to Lithuania,
Lenktoji g.17, 08124 Vilnius, Republic of Lithuania,
Tel.: (370-5) 2075040,2075041