Skarga na przewlekłość postępowania sądowego z perspektywy standardów konstytucyjnego prawa do sądu

The excessive length of judicial and administrative proceedings is not rare in our country. The legislature, bound especially by the requirements of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms introduces and expands the range of measures applied to individuals in cases of undue delay in proceedings. Potential standards of legal protection for designated letter of the law do not, however, suffi ciently translate into the results determining axiological and praxeological character of the right to trial and the right to good administration. One of the reasons for this is an absence of a consistent and comprehensive approach by the courts in implementing effective remedies for excessive length of proceedings. The effectiveness of complaints handling in relation to cases of excessive length should be examined from the perspective of the constitutional principles of access to the courts and Convention requirements developed by the case law of the Court of Human Rights. Remarks on the judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal of 22 October 2015 touch the broader issue of the consequences (effects) of an interpretation of a varied juridical structure under discussion. Depending on what status of the complaint is achieved by cases concerning excessive length of the proceedings and how effective are the mechanisms for remedy applied in this respect, will shape the legal culture in response to unjustifi ably long proceedings in courts. The guarantees of Article 45 of the Constitution and Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention are intended to strengthen the citizens’ trust in the State and legal protection. There are, however, doubts whether the strategy chosen by the constitutional court in the said judgment can used in shaping the standards of transparency and effectiveness of the legal protection of the individual against excessive length of proceedings.