Up-1165/06

The position of the Supreme Court regarding a sufficient statement of reasons for a Government decision is not inconsistent with [the complainant’s] human rights. By taking into consideration the very nature of the institution of the dismissal of an official without reason of culpability, the requirement to provide a statement of reasons for such decision on dismissal cannot be understood as a requirement to state concrete reasons for the dismissal of officials in individual cases, but as a requirement that it must be clearly evident from the decision on dismissal that it is issued on the legal basis which allows dismissal without reason of culpability.

 

Due to the fact that the Supreme Court did not consider the complainant's allegations regarding the abuse of the Government's powers prior to deciding to dismiss the complainant's claim, it violated his right to the equal protection of rights determined in Article 22 of the Constitution. From the aforementioned Constitutional provision namely also follows the requirement that courts must consider, asses, and provide a statement of reasons to accept or dismiss the statements and standpoints of the parties which are provided in accordance with the rules of procedure and are not manifestly legally irrelevant. However, the allegations of the abuse of the Government's powers cannot be defined as manifestly irrelevant.