Recent Judicial Developments of State Responsibility for Delaying Adjudication In Cases: A Comparative Study
Dr. Yahya Mohammed Morsi Al – Nimer
Assistant Professor – Public Law – Kuwait International Law School
The present study aims to examine the recent judicial developments of the State’s responsibility for delaying the adjudication of cases in the State of Kuwait, France, Egypt, the United States of America and Canada, and the European Court of Human Rights; stating the position of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in this regard; To report that responsibility to address the consequences of such delays for the State, society, defendants and clients of the Judicial Facility, and to compensate those injured by the defective proceedings of a public facility, namely, the judiciary.
This study is an attempt to shed light on the historical origin of this commitment, which was written in the Magna Carta, issued in 1215, followed by the Sixth Amendment of the American Constitution on 15 December 1791, the European Convention on Human Rights Of 4 November 1950, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16 December 1966, the Canadian Charter of 17 April 1982, the Constitutions of Egypt, the 1962 Constitution of Kuwait and the position of the legislator on the regulation of that right in those States. The study also showed the conditions of determining the state’s responsibility for the failure to settle cases in a reasonable time, or the violation of the right to speedy trial in the countries in comparison; the recent judicial applications in those countries to determine that responsibility, In those States of development in that regard.
The importance of the study, as well as its consideration of one of the important issues relating to the protection of the rights of those dealing with judicial facilities, appears to have dealt with the assessment of the comparative approach of the judiciary by shedding light on the positive aspects and shortcomings of the judiciary on the determine of that responsibility; The study stressed the possibility of activating this right in both Egypt and Kuwait, with a set of proposals for both the constitutional legislator and the ordinary legislator to take into account in organizing that right; with the disclosure of the means available to the judiciary to determine that responsibility in Egypt and Kuwait; without approaching subjects of conflict with the legislative authority and the constitutional bloc in both countries.
Key words: speedy trial, reasonable delay of case adjudication, treaties and the speed of adjudication of cases, constitution and speedy adjudication of cases, general legal principles and speed of adjudication.