PART V: THE
MANNER OF PROCEDURE IN ADMINISTRATIVE RECOURSE AND IN THE REMOVAL OR TRANSFER
OF PARISH PRIESTS
SECTION I:
RECOURSE AGAINST ADMINISTRATIVE DECREES (Cann. 1732 - 1739)
Can.
1732 Whatever is laid down in the canons of this section concerning decrees, is
also to be applied to all singular administrative acts given in the external
forum outside a judicial trial, except for those given by the Roman Pontiff
himself or by an Ecumenical Council.
Can.
1733 §1 When a person believes that he or she has been injured by a decree, it
is greatly to be desired that contention between that person and the author of
the decree be avoided, and that care be taken to reach an equitable solution by
mutual consultation, possibly using the assistance of serious-minded persons to
mediate and study the matter. In this way, the controversy may by some suitable
method be avoided or brought to an end.
§2 The
Episcopal Conference can prescribe that in each diocese there be established a
permanent office or council which would have the duty, in accordance with the
norms laid down by the Conference, of seeking and suggesting equitable
solutions. Even if the Conference has not demanded this, the Bishop may establish
such an office or council.
§3 The
office or council mentioned in §2 is to be diligent in its work principally
when the revocation of a decree is sought in accordance with Can. 1734 and the
time-limit for recourse has not elapsed. If recourse is proposed against a
decree, the Superior who would have to decide the recourse is to encourage both
the person having recourse and the author of the decree to seek this type of
solution, whenever the prospect of a satisfactory outcome is discerned.
Can.
1734 §1 Before having recourse, the person must seek in writing from its author
the revocation or amendment of the decree. Once this petition has been lodged,
it is by that very fact understood that the suspension of the execution of the
decree is also being sought.
§2 The
petition must be made within the peremptory time-limit of ten canonical days
from the time the decree was lawfully notified.
§3 The
norms in §§1 and 2 do not apply:
1° in
having recourse to the Bishop against decrees given by authorities who are
subject to him;
2° in
having recourse against the decree by which a hierarchical recourse is decided,
unless the decision was given by the Bishop himself ;
3° in
having recourse in accordance with cann. 57 and 1735.
Can.
1735 If, within thirty days from the time the petition mentioned in Can. 1734
reaches the author of the decree, the latter communicates a new decree by which
either the earlier decree is amended or it is determined that the petition is
to be rejected, the period within which to have recourse begins from the
notification of the new decree. If, however, the author of the decree makes no
decision within thirty days, the time-limit begins to run from the thirtieth
day.
Can.
1736 §1 In those matters in which hierarchical recourse suspends the execution
of a decree, even the petition mentioned in Can. 1734 has the same effect.
§2 In other
cases, unless within ten days of receiving the petition mentioned in Can. 1734
the author of the decree has decreed its suspension, an interim suspension can
be sought from the author's hierarchical Superior. This Superior can decree the
suspension only for serious reasons and must always take care that the
salvation of souls suffers no harm.
§3 If the
execution of the decree is suspended in accordance with §2 and recourse is
subsequently proposed, the person who must decide the recourse is to determine,
in accordance with Can. 1737 §3, whether the suspension is to be confirmed or
revoked.
§4 If no
recourse is proposed against the decree within the time-limit established, an
interim suspension of execution in accordance with §§1 and 2 automatically
lapses.
Can.
1737 §1 A person who contends that he or she has been injured by a decree, can
for any just motive have recourse to the hierarchical Superior of the one who
issued the decree. The recourse can be proposed before the author of the
decree, who must immediately forward it to the competent hierarchical Superior.
§2 The
recourse is to be proposed within the peremptory time-limit of fifteen
canonical days. In the cases mentioned in Can. 1734 §3, the timelimit begins to
run from the day the decree was notified; in other cases, it runs in accordance
with Can. 1735.
§3 Even in
those cases in which recourse does not by law suspend the execution of the
decree, or in which the suspension is decreed in accordance with Can. 1736 §2,
the Superior can for a serious reason order that the execution be suspended,
but is to take care that the salvation of souls suffers no harm.
Can.
1738 The person having recourse always has the right to the services of an
advocate or procurator, but is to avoid futile delays. Indeed, an advocate is
to be appointed ex officio if the person does not have one and the Superior
considers it necessary. The Superior, however, can always order that the one
having recourse appear in person to answer questions.
Can.
1739 In so far as the case demands, it is lawful for the Superior who must
decide the recourse, not only to confirm the decree or declare that it is
invalid, but also to rescind or revoke it or, if it seems to the Superior to be
more expedient, to amend it, to substitute for it, or to obrogate it.
|