Does the charter of fundamental rights and the European convention on human rights equally guarantees right to a reasonable length of proceedings protection?

Pastaraisiais metais Europos žmogaus teisių teisme bei Europos Sąjungos teisingumo teisme augo nagrinėtinų bylų skaičius. Statistiniu požiūriu minimų teismų veikla yra ypatingai suintensivėjusi, ypač 2015 – 2016 m. fiksuotini nagrinėtinų bylų rekordai. Ne išimtis ir institucijos kuriose dėl didėjančių krūvių susiduriama su kėblumais, kurie pasižymi ilgu žmogaus situacijos nagrinėjimu. Dėl padidėjusios apkrovos atsiranda grėsmė žmogaus teisių pažeidimams. Kadangi dėl šių priežasčių tendencingai auga proceso trukmės pažeidimai, kyla poreikis peržiūrėti ir gilintis į žmogaus teises saugančius teisės aktus. Darbe siekiama nustatyti, ar Pagrindinių teisių chartijoje ir Europos žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių konvencijoje užtikrinama vienoda teisės į kiek įmanoma trumpesnį bylos nagrinėjimą apsauga. Šiuo klausimu tyrinėjami pagrindiniai minimi teisės aktai, apibrėžiantys asmenų teises, kuriomis užtikrinamas kiek įmanoma trumpesnis bylos nagrinėjimas. Pagrindinių teisių chartija ir Europos žmogaus teisių ir pagrindinių laisvių konvencija bus lyginamos tarpusavyje ir ieškoma ar šie teisės aktai vienodai užtikrina žmogaus teises ar ne? Taip pat, analizuojama Europos žmogaus teisių teismo bei Europos Sąjungos teisingumo teismo praktika, tikslu nustatyti minėtų teisės aktų aiškinimą, sąsajas. Praktikos analizė leidžia išsiaiškinti teisės aktuose nenumatytus kriterijus, kurių pagalba nustatoma proceso trukmė. Darbe analizuojamos teisės kurios užtikrina asmenų teises į teisingą bylos nagrinėjimą, teisminę gynybą taip pat teisę į gerą administravimą. Šiu teisių analizė leidžia įgyti supratimą, kurio pagrindu galimas proceso ilgumo vertinimas, bei tai reglamentuojančių teisės aktų lyginimas.In recent years, the number of cases which had to be examined at the European Court of Human Rights and Court of Justice of the European Union have increased. By the look at the statistical terms of both courts, it can be seen that their activities have intensified a lot, during the year 2015-2016 a record number of examined cases have been captured. Also there are no exceptions for the institutions in which the growing workloads faced with difficulties, which are characterized by a long examination of every persons situation. Due to the increased load of cases, it appears that a threat for human rights violations is raising. Because of these reasons, different cases examination time is violated, and a need of human rights legislation acts analysis is raising. The aim of the work is to determine whether the Charter of fundamental rights and the European convention of human rights and fundamental freedoms ensures the same right to protection to a fair trial. The analysis is done on the main mentioned acts, that defines the rights of individuals, which has to ensure the shortest case examination. A comparison of Charter of fundamental rights and the European convention of human rights and fundamental freedoms will be done and it will be seen if such legislations equally provides same human rights? Also, the analysis of the European court of human rights and the court of Justice of the European Union will be done to determine the purpose of the interpretation of the mentioned legislations. Practical analysis helps to find out the criterias, which is not covered in the legislations and which establishes the duration of the cases examination process. This work also consists of analysis of the legislations which ensures the protection of the right to a fair trial, a judicial remedy and the right to good administration. The analysis of these rights will allow to gain understanding of the process, on the basis of the assessment of the possible length and compare the legislations. In general, the main purpose of this thesis is to compare and find out how does the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights equally guarantees right to a reasonable length of proceedings protection? In the first part of this work, a correct describtion and analysis of the right to a reasonable length of proceedings concept will be done. Based on international law and scientific articles. It will be summarized to the reference of the law. In the second part of the work, the main articles of the Convention which governs every persons right to a reasonable length of proceedings, will be explained and examined. Also, an examination of such rights application according to the Convention will be done. In the third part of the work there will be the examination of the status of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. Besided that, the interpretation on the provisions, which shall ensure as far as possible length towards a reasonable of proceedings will done, by also reviewing the right to good administration, fair judicial proceedings and right to judicial defence concepts. In this section, a relationship and interference will be brought out between the Charter of Fundamental Rights and European Convention on Human Rights and Freedoms. The last section of the work is about what additional criterias could be applicable to the legislations when there are dealt with the questions about duration of the process. The section also includes , the case law of human rights and court of justice. As well as an overview of the jurisprudence of the courts, it helps to find out which of acts guarantees better, more reasonable length of proceedings security. According to my research, every persons right to reasonable length of proceedings should be interpreted and identified as the content of the right to fair trial. Why evaluating other aspects, this right is connected with right to a judicial remedy, correct and concentrated proceedings. Right to a reasonable length of proceedings helps to prevent the abuse of the procedural rights. Also this principle requires a well-organised work from the appropriate authorities. The analysis of the Convention and its applications limits helps to find out how this provision may be relied on. Except where is dealing with the civil rights and obligations, or the issue of criminal charges, but the Court of human rights explained that Article 6 of the Convention must be guaranteed not only in civil and criminal matters, but also in administrative proceedings. The comparison of both acts have helped to find out, that the Charter, as the act, may never be lower than the Convention. The interpretation of the rights covered in the Charter must rely on the Convention. Court of Justice legislated that none of them have no higher power. Also the analysis of case law and its criterias which helps to find out more clearly how does the right to a reasonable length of proceedings was violated or not? The case law analysis was important because these criteria is nowhere codified. According to the Court of human rights and Court of justice legislation Charter of fundamental rights and the European convention on human rights equally guarantees right to a reasonable length of proceedings protection