PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2014 | 4 | nr 1 | 1--20
Tytuł artykułu

The Status of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman in the Republic of Lithuania: Selected Problematic Issues

Warianty tytułu
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
EN
The present article aims at discussing the legal force and types of decisions adopted by the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman's Office, which is the main body supervising implementation of the principle of equality in Lithuania. It is a paradox, but in the Lithuanian legal system there is no definite attitude regarding the legal effects of the Ombudsman Office's decisions, and frequently the question of whether these decisions can be appealed against is raised. With uncertainty existing in the Lithuanian legal community, a controversial situation has arisen in which the decisions of the Ombudsman are challenged to administrative courts or to the Chief Administrative Disputes Commission, although the activity of the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman's Office as an Ombudsman's body is characterised by 'the force of law' and is not subject to appeal. The main task of this paper is to determine the legal force of the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman's decisions and the possibility of challenging them. For this purpose it is intended to: 1) analyse the fundamental regulations of activities undertaken by the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman's Office; 2) identify the main types of decisions taken by the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman; 3) determine the legal force of those decisions and the possibilities to appeal against them from the perspective of positive law. The main conclusion of our research is that the Office of the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman can issue only one type of judicially binding decision, which declares an individual guilty of committing a violation of administrative law violation for which administrative sanctions may be imposed. Judicially non-binding decisions of the Ombudsman have the official status of written evidence and can be used in civil and administrative proceedings when questions of of illegal dismissal and salary reductions arise, as well as other issues related to violations of the equality principle. It should be noted that such decisions by the Ombudsman should not be contested, despite the contrary practice of ourts. The authors of the article maintain that the decisions adopted by the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman's Office are recommendatory in nature and must be respected and implemented in good faith. (original abstract)
Rocznik
Tom
4
Numer
Strony
1--20
Opis fizyczny
Twórcy
  • Mykolas Romeris University
  • Office of the Equal Opportunities Ombudsman
Bibliografia
  • Alina Žvinklienė, Socialinė lygių galimybių kontrolieriaus tarnybos refleksija: Lietuvos "Web 2.0 bendruomenės" atvejis' (2012), < http://www.lstc.lt/leidiniai.php> accessed 19August 2014.
  • Annual report (HALDE 2009).
  • A.R. v Equal Opportunities Ombudsman's Office [2008] A-525-825-08.
  • Birutė Pranevičienė, Ombudsman and Public Administration (2002) 32 (24) "Jurisprudence".
  • Centrum voor gelijkheid van kansen en voor racismebestrijding v Firma Feryn NV [2008] C 54/07.
  • Code of Civil Procedure of Republic of Lithuania [2002] OJ 36-1340 (Art. 49).
  • Chiara Favilli, Institution of a body for the promotion of equal treatment, provided for EU law in European Union Law (2002).
  • Dagmar Schiek, Lisa Waddington and Mark Bell, Cases, Materials and Text on National,Supranational and International Non - discrimination law (Hart Publishing 2007).
  • Darius Urbonas, Jurisdictional activities of quasi-judicial institutions in imposing administrative sanctions (Doctoral Dissertation Social Sciences, Law) (Mykolas RomerisUniversity 2007).
  • Diana Gumbrevičiūtė-Kuzminskienė, The concept of shifting the burden of proof and the mechanism in the cases of employment discrimination (2008) 110 (8) "Jurisprudence".
  • Edita Žiobienė, Problems of the Legal Status of the National Equality Bodies (2006) 90(12) "Jurisprudence".
  • Edita Žiobienė, Problems of the Legal Status of the National Equality Bodies (2006) 90(12) "Jurisprudence".
  • Edita Žiobienė, Reform of the Ombudsman Institutions in Lithuania (2010) 119 (1) "Jurisprudence".
  • Egidijus Kūris et al., Lithuanian legal institutions (Registrų centras 2011).
  • European Court of First Instance [2002] T-209/00.
  • Equinet Report, Influencing the law through legal proceedings - the powers and practicesof equality bodies (Equinet 2010).
  • Equinet Annual Report (Equinet 2009).
  • Equinet Annual Report (Equinet 2006).
  • International Covenant of Social, Cultural and Economic Rights [2002] 77-3290.
  • Jonas Malmberg, Effective enforcement of EC Labour Law - A comparative analysis ofCommunity law requirements for national laws on procedures and sanctions (2004) 2 "European Journal of Industrial Relations" 10.
  • Kaunas County Court, civil case No. 2-1105-527/2010; Vilnius County Court, civil caseNo. 2-1189-545/2008.
  • Law on Administrative procedure Of Republic of Lithuania [199] OJ 13-138 (Art. 56, part 1).
  • Lyma Project results (BASNET forum 2012).
  • Marshall v. Southampton Area Health Authority [1991] C-271/91.
  • Ona Gražina Rakauskienė, Aušrinė Burneikienė et al., Public Policy on the Aspect ofGender Equality (Mykolas Romeris University 2005).
  • Ricardo Hausmann, Laura Tyson, Saadia Zahidi et al., The Global Gender Gap Report(World Economic Forum 2009).
  • R.J. v Lithuanian Republic, represented by Equal Opportunities Ombudsman [2009] I- 243-602/2009.
  • Public Company "Vilniaus miškų urėdija" v. The Office of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman [2010] I-342-602/2010.
  • Robert Baruch, Joseph Folger, The Promise of Mediation (Jossey-Bass Publishers 2004).
  • Saulė Vidrinskaitė, The Parliament Ombudsmen in the system of authority institutions in Vesta Adomaitienė (ed), Lithuanian Constitutional Law: Development, Institutions,Protection of Rights, Self-Government (Mykolas Romeris University 2007).
  • Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania [2008] A-525-825-08.
  • Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania [2013] A492-2078/2013.
  • Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania [2006] A-15-1982/2006.
  • Supreme Court of the Republic of Lithuania [2010] 3K-2-141/2010.
  • Treaty establishing the European Economic Community [1957].
  • Treaty on European Union [1992] OJ C 191.
  • The Convention of fundamental human rights and freedoms [1995] 40-987.
  • The decision of Parliament of Republic of Lithuania on the confirming the regulations ofthe Office of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman [2003] OJ 111- 4930.
  • The Law on Equal Opportunities of Women and Men of Republic of Lithuania [1998] OJ112-3100.
  • The Law on Equal Treatment of Republic of Lithuania [2003] OJ 114-5115.
  • The report of the Office of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman (2013), http://www.lygybe.lt/?pageid=7accessed 19 August 2014.
  • The report of the Office of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman (2010), http://www.lygybe.lt/?pageid=7accessed 19 August 2014.
  • The report of the Office of Equal Opportunities Ombudsman (2008), http://www.lygybe.lt/?pageid=7accessed 19 August 2014.
  • Universal Declaration of Human rights [2006] OJ 68-2497.
  • Vilnius Regional Administrative Court [2009} I-243-602/2009.
  • Vilnius Regional Administrative Court [2010] I-342-602/2010.
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikatory
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171323851

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.