ՈՒՂՂԱԿԻ ԴԱՏԱԿԱՆ ՎԵՐԱՀՍԿՈՂՈՒԹՅԱՆ «ՕԲՅԵԿՏ» ԵՎ «ԱՌԱՐԿԱ» ԵԶՐՈՒՅԹՆԵՐԸ ՀՀ ՎԱՐՉԱԿԱՆ ԴԱՏԱՎԱՐՈՒԹՅՈՒՆՈՒՄ

Abstract

The author conducts a comprehensive analysis of judicial practice and doctrinal approaches to defining the concepts of "object" and "subject" of judicial control in the administrative proceedings of the Republic of Armenia. The article highlights the problems and ambiguities in the use of these terms by the courts of Armenia and proposes ways to clarify and unify them to ensure consistency and clarity in judicial decisions. The author identifies two main groups of approaches to distinguishing the object and subject of judicial control in relation to normative legal acts in administrative proceedings. According to the first group, the object and subject of judicial control are considered equivalent concepts, but the preference is given to the formulation "subject of judicial control." The second group of authors seeks to clearly differentiate these concepts, where the object of control is considered to be normative legal acts that are subject to court scrutiny, while the subject of control is their lawfulness in accordance with acts possessing higher legal force. In the article author proposes adopting a doctrinal approach to defining the object and subject of judicial control in administrative proceedings of Armenia, including a clear differentiation of these concepts in court decisions. The author emphasizes the importance of correct usage of terminology to ensure legal clarity and unambiguity in judicial rulings. In conclusion, the article presents well-founded conclusions and recommendations regarding the application of the terms "object" and "subject" of judicial control in administrative proceedings of Armenia, and underscores the necessity of maintaining unity and consistency in judicial practice to improve the efficiency of judicial procedures and protect the rights and interests of citizens and organizations in Armenia.