Folia Theologica et Canonica 7. 29/21 (2018)
Lectio magistralis
14 S.E.R. FRANS DANEELS, O.Praem. trative decisions of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in relation to the delicta graviora\ So recourse to the Apostolic Signatura cannot be made directly, for example, against an administrative act of a diocesan Bishop. Recourse must first be made to the competent Dicastery of the Roman Curia (competence being determined by the matter of the decision). If the Dicastery conhrms the decision of the Bishop, then recourse may be lodged against the approved act before the Apostolic Signatura. If the Dicastery takes another decision, the recourse can only be presented to the Apostolic Signatura against this decision by any party who feels aggrieved by the new decision (such as by the Diocesan Bishop whose decision was modified, or by the original recurrent who is not satisfied with the decision). In particular, if the Dicastery decides to reject the recourse because it has been presented after the legal deadline, or because the person who presented it had no legal standing, the recourse to the Apostolic Signatura can concern only this decision and not the original decision. c. Violation of the law The recourse must also concern a violation of the law. This element is sufficiently clear as regards the alleged violations of the procedural law (in procedendoj: either the lower authority or the Dicastery followed the canonical rules of procedure, or this was not the case. However, if the Apostolic Signatura decides that there is proof that there has been a violation of the law in this sense, it is possible that the lower authority or the Dicastery can renew its decision, this time respecting correctly the procedure. For this reason, those who file a contentious-administrative recourse must know that, if their complaint concerns only an alleged violation of the law in procedendo, the end result could be that nothing would change except that it would have taken more time to reach the same conclusion. The question of an alleged violation of the law with respect to the substance of a decision (in decernendo) is more difficult. It is not enough for a person to disagree with the decision in question, even for reasons that seem reasonable. While a Dicastery can give judgment according to the opportunity, wisdom, prudence, etc., of the administrative act in question, and has the power not only to confirm it or to declare it void, but also to amend it (can. 1739), the Apostolic Signatura is competent only to decide whether or not the law has been violated. Thus, for many administrative decisions, canon law has no particular requirements as to the reasons for making these decisions. For these, a just reason suf- 7 7 C. pro Doctrina Fidei, Normae de gravioribus delictis: AAS 102 (2010) 419-434, art. 27. Already in the Agendi ratio in doctrinarum examine of the same Dicastery of 29 June 1997. according to its final provision, recourse to the Apostolic Signatura against the penal sanctions, of which in artt. 28-29, was excluded by Pope John Paul II (AAS 89 f 19971 830-835).
