Suchergebnisse

Minētajā darbā autore pēta samērīguma principa saturu veidojošos aspektus, kā arī aplūko samērīguma principa pārkāpumu novēršanas mehānismus valstī. Autore analizē problēmu rašanās cēloņus samērīguma principa ievērošanā, kā arī Eiropas kontroles iespējas minētā principa ievērošanai Latvijā. Skaidrojot samērīguma principa būtību, autore analizē to, kādā veidā šis princips ir nostiprināts Latvijas Republikas normatīvajos aktos, kā arī aplūko samērīguma principa, iestādes rīcības brīvības un lietderības apsvērumu savstarpējo sakarību. Pētot samērīguma principa ievērošanas problēmas Latvijā, autore analizē problēmu – vai tiesību piemērotājam ir jāievēro samērīguma princips, izdodot obligāto administratīvo aktu? Atbildot uz šo jautājumu, autore aplūko virkni pazīstamu juristu viedokļu, kā arī norāda un pamato savus apsvērumus. ; In this paper the author researches the esence of proportionality principle and studies the mechanisms for removing infringements of proportionality principle in the state. The author analyses the reasons of rising the problems in observance of proportionality principle and the possibilities of european institutions to control proportionality principle`s observance in Latvia. Explaning the esence of proportionality principle, the author analyses, how this principle is represented in normative acts of the Republic of Latvia, and also examines the intercommunication between proportionality principle, discretion of the state government offices and considerations of expediency. Researching the problems of proportionality principle`s observance in Latvia, the author analyses – whether the law-applying authorities should observe the proportionality principle in issuing of compulsory administrative acts? Answering this question the author studies opinions of the famous lawyers and expresses its own considerations.

Traditionally, international law has established a binary distinction between jus ad bellum and jus in bello. The former relates to the right to exercise military force. The latter regulates the conduct of adversaries engaged in an armed conflict. However, the prevailing legal approach doesn't accept this dichotomy. It wants to reduce war's hazards by applying the ad bellum rules, including the proportionality requirement, continuously throughout the conduct of armed conflict. To that end, it has established factors that define the essence of the continuing ad bellum proportionality requirement. This article challenges the near-unanimous consensus regarding these factors. It argues that their strict application is not normatively desirable and might be counter-effective in light of the proportionality requirement's de-escalation rationale. It further suggests replacing the micro constraining factors with a macro standard, constraining the use of force, throughout the armed conflict, to the minimum required to achieve a lawful war aim.

This paper intends to cover some views (not all), with regard to Reason of the Unreason of law. Yes, so to speak, can or could think of a reason for the law,why not much more, in an "unreasonable" or rather how many additional "unreasonable" the same.