Search

Constitutional courts in several European democracies are under stress. In Italy, the inefficiency of the system of government has led to increasing calls for the Court to intervene in crucial legislative matters. This article examines how and why the Constitutional Court plays a key role in contemporary Italian politics. First, it focuses on the determining factors of the political system that have strengthened the Constitutional Court vis-à-vis other political branches. Second, through a quali-quantitative analysis, it focuses on controversial decision-making techniques that have enabled constitutional judges to participate in the law-making process. It focuses on the so-called 'warnings to the legislature', which correspond to formal invitations to parliament to intervene in a particular discipline. It then examines the 'manipulative judgments' that have pushed the boundaries of constitutional adjudication, with the Court increasingly assuming the role of 'positive legislator'. Third, the article examines the consequences of the Court's expanding role in specific policy areas, shedding light on recent judicial decisions relating to assisted suicide. The aim of the article is to contribute to the understanding of the changing role of Constitutional courts in democratic political regimes at a time of their more or less manifest crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the most important aspects of making the 1990 Croatian Constitutional Court was the 'establishment of an independent and potentially powerful' court. For the first time since 1963, the Court obtained full powers of judicial review. Yet, despite its newly gained powers, the Croatian Constitutional Court refrained from an activist approach adopted by other constitutional courts in the region and was not fond of annulling laws adopted by the legislator. One possible explanation of such a conformist approach was the ideological consonance between the centre-right legislative and the centre-right Court. Most of the constitutional judges were appointed by the centre-right party (HDZ), which held the majority in the Parliament during the first decade of the country's independence. However, recent years have witnessed an increase in the dissenting opinions, following the nomination of five judges from the centre-left opposition (SDP) to a predominantly centre-right Court. Based on the large-scale data collection efforts, this paper looks into the origin of these nominations, as well as their effect on the emergance of dissenting opinion and the growing ideological polarisation on the Court, which changed the relationship between judicial and legislative powers in Croatia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Spanish Constitutional Court has occupied a central position in the Spanish political system since the Transition. Its decisions have completed, and still complete, the articles of the 1978 Constitution. Nevertheless, despite its intense activity in civil and administrative issues, this institution has progressively lost support among public opinion. To a large extent, the Court is now considered a politicized organization serving the interests of Conservative political forces. The growing intrusion of the judiciary in Spanish politics has increased this feeling. How to explain this biased viewpoint? In this paper, we argue that there are two reasons for this declining trust. On the one hand, the Court is the collateral victim of party politics which forced it to take sides. The Court is subject to a process of polarization affecting the whole Spanish political system. On the other hand, the Court has interfered regularly in the political debate by imposing its view, up to blocking parliamentary debates in late 2022. This double process is analysed from a new institutional perspective. We identified four critical junctures involving the Court and political parties, namely the delaying of decisions, the veto on governmental policy, the recusing of justices, and the blockade of appointments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper contains an analysis of the importance of the involvement of the Constitutional Court in overseeing the process of amending the 1945 Constitution by the MPR so that the results are always in line with the provisions of Article 37 of the 1945 Constitution. Although the law has provided guidelines that the MPR can only make changes to the articles of the constitution as previously proposed, there is a potential for the MPR to ignore these provisions, thus opening up the opportunity for abuse of power that can harm the interests of the people. The proposed solution to correct the MPR's mistakes for violating article 37 of the 1945 Constitution is that the Constitutional Court must overturn the MPR's decision through a judicial review mechanism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Constitutional Court of Kosovo, envisioned as a cornerstone institution for upholding constitutional order and safeguarding fundamental human rights and freedoms, has assumed a pivotal role in the nation's legal landscape. Since its establishment, it has become a prominent figurehead in addressing claims of constitutional violations, often surpassing the expectations of its drafters and the governing law. This paper aims to delve into the court's transformation and its influence on Kosovo's political landscape, focusing on key cases that have shaped its evolution. It examines the court's pivotal role, the challenges it faces, and its lasting impact on Kosovo's legal and political landscape by analyzing the constitutional provisions and other legal acts that govern the Court's competencies. Additionally, it explores the main court decisions and its practices to illustrate how its work manifests in practice. This paper aims to explore the mechanisms and entities responsible for assessing the constitutionality of legal measures, constitutional amendments, and statutes within the context of Kosovo's legal system. It concludes that the Constitutional Court of Kosovo has emerged as the most influential entity in the institutional landscape of Kosovo. It has assumed the primary role in upholding constitutional order, the rule of law, and democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Armenia gained its independence in 1991 following the dissolution of the Soviet Union and has drafted three constitutions in 1995, 2005, and 2015. Constitutional amendments transitioned the country from a parliamentary system to a semi-presidential system, and with the 2015 amendment, Armenia returned to a parliamentary republic. The preamble of all three amendments refers to Armenia’s Declaration of Independence of 1990, which outlines the principles and goals of the Armenian state. The reference enshrines in the constitution the provision in the Declaration of Independence regarding the unification of Karabakh with Armenia and the inclusion of Mount Ararat in the State Emblem. When a peace agreement with Azerbaijan comes before the Armenian Constitutional Court, it is likely that the Court will rule it unconstitutional. Achieving normalization and lasting peace in the Caucasus today is intertwined with Armenia’s constitutional changes and the absence of reference to the Declaration of Independence in the new constitutional amendments. As Armenia is expected to embark on a new constitution-making process, it will be necessary to address the effects of the irredentist ideology contained in the Declaration of Independence on the constitution in a manner consistent with the current circumstances, and to normalize Armenia’s fundamental laws. This article evaluates the impact of Armenia’s constitutional transformation process on the new constitution by examining decisions based on Armenia’s Declaration of Independence made by the Armenian Constitutional Court and analyzing the Declaration’s influence on Armenia’s development and its intention to foster good relations with its neighbors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims to examine the review of the principle of justice on the policy of former corruption convicts in legislative candidacy and its implications for the General Election Commission (KPU). This research uses a qualitative normative juridical method by relying on a statutory approach and a literature approach by analyzing data obtained from literature studies related to the problematics of former corruption convicts in legislative candidacy. The results of this study state that the Constitutional Court Decision Number 12/PUU-XXI/2023 has fulfilled three conceptions of justice. The implication of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 12/PUU-XXI/2023 is the presence of a revision of the General Election Commission Regulation, namely General Election Commission Regulation Number 10 of 2023 concerning the Nomination of Members of the House of Representatives, Provincial Regional House of Representatives, and Regency / City Regional House of Representatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Indonesia, a diverse and sprawling archipelago nation, is a place where modernity often intersects with tradition, especially in certain parts of the area broadly known to the outside world as Papua. This article analyzes how the Indonesian Constitutional Court has upheld legal pluralism through noken, a traditional voting model used in elections in remote, mountainous parts of Papua in easternmost Indonesia. Legal pluralism, defined as the coexistence of multiple legal systems or norms within a single society, is a concept deeply embedded in the Indonesian legal landscape. The noken system includes a method where tribal chiefs or community leaders vote on behalf of their entire local area, after consensus is reached in a community meeting, with the votes being placed in a traditional woven bag, called a noken. Although the noken system differs from the universal suffrage model applied by the Indonesian Election Law, its constitutionality is guaranteed under a landmark decision handed down by the Indonesian Constitutional Court in 2009. That decision reinforced the validity of legal pluralism in Indonesia, including in elections. However, the Constitutional Court subsequently limited the constitutionality of implementing the noken system as Papuan society gradually transitions to the national electoral system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Indonesia's Regional Representative Council, the second chamber in the nation's legislative system, has been criticized as insignificant because its role in law-making is unequal to that of the more powerful House of Representatives. Various efforts have been made to remedy the situation, including the submission of judicial reviews before the Constitutional Court. This article analyzes whether judicial review has succeeded in enhancing the role and powers of the Council. Using an evidence-based research approach, it examines the extent to which decisions made by the Constitutional Court have improved the Council's powers. Application of this analysis offers the potential to broaden understanding of the development of the Council and its efforts to strengthen its powers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The proposal for a new approach to judicial review in Rosalind Dixon's book Responsive Judicial Review: Democracy and Dysfunction in the Modern Age builds on the ideas of John Hart Ely presented in his seminal work Democracy and Distrust. The purpose of this article is to engage with the idea of the responsive approach to judicial review being embraced by the Slovenian constitutional court. The article purports to contribute to a larger effort – to a comparative and sociologically informed discussion on judicial review in different jurisdictions that aims to predict the potential of responsive judicial review in Central and Eastern European courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This commentary is an analysis of the Ecuadorian constitutional jurisprudence on the recognition of wild animals as subjects of rights. The scope of the recognition was discussed by studying the two theories that justify the protection of animals and the criteria established by the Court regarding animal law. In this way, the results suggest that the animalist theory is the ideal one to create a legal regime for animal protection, since it individualizes animals and gives them intrinsic value, unlike the environmentalist theory adopted by the Court. In addition, the change in status in favor of wild animals excluded urban fauna, so the decision limited the scope of their protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Frequently cited in the literature on recent Thai politics, Duncan McCargo’s influential “network monarchy” concept is nonetheless inadequately developed. As such, it has been questioned and challenged by several scholars in recent years. In his 2021 Pacific A!airs article, McCargo rebuts many of these scholars’ arguments and defends his concept. His defence is unpersuasive, however. It falls short of elaborating on the scope, composition, and modus operandi of network monarchy, leaving the shortcomings of his original concept unrectified. Most seriously, McCargo now accentuates the “ambiguous” quality of network monarchy—a quality he did not emphasize originally—in order to accommodate new empirical anomalies and counter his critics. By so doing, he renders his argument unfalsifiable. Drawing on Robert Cribb’s thoughts, this article first spells out why or how the insu!ciently developed network monarchy concept has become so widespread in the first place. It then examines the untenable nature of McCargo’s rejoinder to his critics, especially to Eugénie Mérieau. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the behavior of the Constitutional Court in Turkey. As the highest court in the country, it is responsible for many decisions that have shaped the course of Turkish politics over the past six decades. It begins with a brief overview of the institutional features of the Turkish Constitutional Court. It then looks at major arguments on constitutional review, including judicial independence and court-curbing. Finally, it examines change and continuity in the attitudes of the Court based on the speeches of its presidents. One conclusion is that the Constitutional Court has transformed itself from that of the defender of the state principles to that of the defender of human rights while retaining its role with regard to the separation of powers. This transformation has been driven by both internal and external pressures: the domestic transition of tutelary democracy to competitive authoritarianism and the equivocation of domestic laws with international treaties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article deals with the role of the Lithuanian Constitutional Court in ensuring the effectiveness of the Constitution. This research is based on the assumption that the success of constitutional review in a given state is determined (and at the same time characterized) by the following key preconditions: the social, political and legal environment of the state; the scope of powers of the constitutional court; and the presence of a jurisprudential or living constitution. Therefore, in order to achieve the aim of this research, the following tasks are undertaken and dealt with: (1) to discuss the challenges and achievements of the Lithuanian Constitutional Court in the broader context of constitutional justice institutions of Central and Eastern European states; (2) to overview the Lithuanian constitutional justice model and its development; (3) to analyze the emergence of the jurisprudential or living constitution in Lithuania. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The principle of separation of powers is one of the most important constitutional principles underlying the organization of public power. In interpreting this principle, the Lithuanian Constitutional Court has defined it is a fundamental principle of the organization and functioning of a democratic state governed by the rule of law, which requires not only separation of the branches of government but also ensuring a balance between them. The constitutional rule stating that 'in Lithuania, State power is executed by the Seimas , the President of the Republic and the Government, and the Judiciary' is the starting point for revealing the content of the principle of separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution. This article discusses the exercise of legislative, executive and judicial powers by the public authorities specified in the Constitution and presents some cases of violation of the constitutional principle of separation of powers that have been examined by the Lithuanian Constitutional Court. These issues are analyzed in the context of challenges to the principle of separation of powers in other Central and Eastern European countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Lithuania's 1992 Constitution has undergone a series of amendments, including certain structural changes. Besides formal amendments, constitutional regulation is subject to reinterpretation in the Constitutional Court's case law. As a result, not only the content of specific provisions of the Constitution, but also the very perception of constitutional law has been reshaped by, inter alia , reducing the system of sources of constitutional law to only the Constitution and official constitutional doctrine. Recently the Constitutional Court, in an activist move, undertook modification of the settled new paradigm by introducing the notion of 'supra-constitutionality' and by postulating which constitutional provisions, until then deemed amendable, were non-amendable. The article deals with the doctrine in both the historical and the theoretical context and with its effect on the perception of constitutional law, in particular its structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Peru, the Constitutional Court has jurisdiction to resolve unconstitutionality and conflicts processes in a single instance, and must do so through the interpretation of constitutional norms, as it is the highest body of control and interpretation of the Constitution. This research analyzes the position assumed by the Court in the face of conflicts between Congress and the Executive Power during the unstable political period 2016-2021. In the control of the laws and the modifications to the Rules of Congress approved by the parliamentary majorities elected in 2016 and 2020, the dissolution of Congress decreed on September 30, 2019 by the Executive and the vote of confidence, established important guidelines of constitutional interpretation; however, this did not occur in matters such as the control of the presidential vacancy due to permanent moral incapacity, the extraordinary emergency decrees issued by the Government while the dissolution of Congress lasted and the rules incorporated in the New Constitutional Procedural Code on votes in the Court for the resolution of constitutional processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The presented research is relevant, as the Constitutional Court of Bosnia has certain extremely specific powers that can determine the specifics of the legal nature of this state. The purpose of the article is to study of the influence of the Constitutional Court on the vital national interests of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). Within the framework of this study, a set of methods was used, the central of which was the method of systems analysis, which allowed the author to analyse the degree of participation of the constitutional control body in ensuring the stability of the law-making process. It was revealed that the implementation of the constitutional project is associated with ensuring the parity of interests of constitutive peoples and making the state mechanism provided in the Constitution effective. It was concluded that the Constitutional Court significantly influenced the change in the structure and content of the institution of protection of vital interests in Bosnia and Herzegovina. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia plays the primary role in reviewing the constitutionality of the norms. However, 45 Constitutional Court Decisions (related to exiting criminal acts) made during the period of 2003–2020, as which this study examined revealed the Court tendency to go beyond its formal authority, in the sense of establishing new legal norms. Considering the legality principle, it is suggested that the practice of criminal norm making should be tightly controlled and restricted. For that purpose, the authors suggest that the court decide to make new criminal norms only with the purpose of clarifying obscure wording and society's express needed demand. With this restriction, it is hoped that the Constitutional Court will not exceed its authority. Restrictions are needed given the need for the Constitutional Court to formulate norms. There are at least 5 (five) basic reasons for the need for judicial activism in the Constitutional Court, namely: (1) The Court as the final interpreter of the constitution; (2) A violation of the constitution; (3) Executive and legislative indifference; (4) Open questions in the Act; and (5) The existence of responsiveness and innovation from the Constitutional Court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Thailand's military-aligned government saw its popularity plummet in polls throughout 2022. Yet former head of the armed forces and current prime minister Prayut Chan-o-cha was resilient in the face of mass party defections, a falling-out with his fellow party leader and long-time friend Prawit Wongsuwon, a censure debate, and even a constitutional court case threatening to remove him from office. The mass street protests that were a constant feature of the previous three years evaporated as conservative forces used the controversial Section 112 Royal Defamation Law to silence the various movements' leaders. Political attention was focused on the impending elections, which shook up the party system with rampant party mergers and switching. Meanwhile a return to the 2011 electoral rules fueled talk of another Pheu Thai landslide in the next elections. The economy began to improve with the relaxing of COVID rules and the return of tourism, throwing a lifeline to a rapidly sinking Prayut, who himself switched to a new political party before the year's end. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The issue of Catalonian nationalism has historically been a highly controversial subject in Spanish politics. Although relevant and debated for decades, we can observe significant changes in its dynamics throughout the years. The Spanish Constitution of 1978 laid out the current territorial organization of Spain as a «State of Autonomies», initially supported by the Catalonian nationalism movement. However, this support has gradually decreased to a blatant opposition. More recently, the Catalonian nationalism has evolved to a completely secessionist movement. An evident example of this is the referendum held on 10-1-17, as well as the protests and controversies surrounding it. This change of paradigm was not a sudden drift, but rather a gradual transition of the societal perception of the State of Autonomies and how the Spanish territorial administration affects Catalonia. This paper explores how the Constitutional Court ruling 31/2010 influenced this societal and political change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The 6th legal basis of Constitutional Court Decision 140/2018 analyzes the effects and scope of art. 96 of the Spanish Constitution. The unconstitutionality of Organic Law 1/2014 is dismissed in this decision, but this law is not in accordance with the international treaties signed by Spain related to universal jurisdiction. This decision has opened a doctrinal debate in Spain, in which it is mentioned for the first time the term «conventionality control». Whether art. 96.1 of the Spanish Constitution allows a control of conventionality, of a diffuse nature, prompts the analysis of the notion of such control in countries such as France or Italy, to immediately focus on the Spanish case. It could be convenient, also in this case, to reaffirm the concentrated nature of the Spanish constitutionality control system or, if preferred, not to erode the supremacy of the Constitutional Court over the ordinary courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The position of the constitutional court is of utmost importance for the rule of law in any country. However, the importance of the position of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina stems from the fact that an international armed conflict occurred on the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which led to peace negotiations resulting in a new Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The new constitutional solutions are very specific and, given that they were not adopted in regular procedure but as a result of compromise aimed at ending the conflict, they are often perceived as flawed. The specificity of these solutions is also reflected in the complexity of the legal system, which greatly affects the development and prosperity of the state. This complexity is particularly emphasized and evident when we talk about attempts to weaken the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, degrade that institution, damage its reputation, and attempt to minimize its decision-making powers or transfer them to entity constitutional courts (the Constitutional Court of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Constitutional Court of Republika Srpska), which could lead to the collapse or erosion of the system of legal norms. In this context, one may ask, what if we did not have the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina? Who would be a shield of the Dayton Peace Agreement and the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina? Of course, without degrading the institutions of the entity constitutional courts, it is important to emphasize the primary importance of the existence of a state constitutional court. Through this paper, we will primarily try to explain the significance of the existence of constitutional courts, some of their peculiarities, say something about their general competences, the selection and appointment of judges, but also explain in detail the significance and importance of the functioning of entity constitutional courts, as well as the relationship between the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the entity constitutional courts, the collision of competences between the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the entity constitutional courts, and carry out a comparative legal analysis with the constitutional judiciary of Germany, a country that has a similar constitutional and legal system within the European continental legal framework, all relying on relevant literature and case law. We will also touch on different types of independence of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina and try to present the complexity of the constitutional legal system of Bosnia and Herzegovina through practical cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research article using a documentary analysis methodology, tries to expose the jurisprudential developments that have occurred by the Constitutional Court and the Labor Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice in relation to the fundamental right of reinforced labor or occupational stability. The foregoing, with the purpose of studying cases of guardianship files that were resolved by lower court judges in the framework of the Covid-19 pandemic and that demanded the protection of this right and with these to check whether the rulings adhere to the jurisprudential criteria established by the high courts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this article is to highlight the potential role of the constitutional court as a multidisciplinary forum where different parts of the legal system are brought together on the basis of common principles enshrined in the Constitution. The court is in a good institutional position to acquire a systematic view of the legal order as a whole. This feature is of particular relevance in civil law countries, whose judiciaries tend to exhibit a high degree of specialization. The interdisciplinary conversation that may develop within the constitutional court is a form of Socratic dialogue that helps overcome cognitive biases caused by excessive specialization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The constitutional rights of Indonesian citizens have been regulated in the 1945 Constitution, that constitutional rights are the rights of citizens which include the right to live, the right to have a family and continue offspring, the right to self-development, the right to obtain justice and access to the same law, the right to personal freedom, the right to feel safe, the right to welfare, the right to participate in government, women's rights and children's rights. One of the efforts to safeguard the rights of citizens that have been protected by the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia is the establishment of a state institution whose job is to handle all matters relating to constitutional rights in the country, namely the Constitutional Court. The 1945 Constitution gives limited authority to the Constitutional Court to examine laws passed by the president against the constitution. By using normative legal research methodology and literature studies and using a conceptual approach (conceptional approach). This research will discuss the protection of citizens' constitutional rights from the president's authority in forming PERPU which is subjective. The result of this research is that efforts to protect citizens' constitutional rights can be carried out based on protection from the Constitutional Court as an institution that carries out a constitutional review of laws drafted by the president as well as restrictions on the president's authority in establishing PERPU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Can constitutional court decisions shape public opinion on a governmental policy? Previous studies have focused on the US Supreme Court, which enjoys a high degree of public support as the major resource of power for courts. In this study, we examine the extent to which courts can influence public opinion regarding a government bill at European courts. First, we argue that the public support for courts also allows them to move public opinion on policies into the direction of their decisions. This works in both directions: they can confer legitimacy to a policy that they support, but they can also de‐legitimize a policy that they oppose. Second, we argue that this mechanism strongly depends on the amount of support that a court receives. It only has an effect for courts that possess a higher institutional legitimacy and among the group of citizens trusting a court. We test our arguments by combining a most different systems design for France and Germany with a survey priming experiment on a school security bill. France and Germany are selected for a most different systems design as they exhibit different institutional designs as well as different levels of support for the court at the aggregate level. The survey experiment is implemented within large national election surveys, the German Internet Panel and the French National Election Study. Both experiments contain more than 2,600 respondents each. Our survey experiment primes for decision outcomes and different institutions to understand whether there are differences between an institution supporting and opposing a policy and between a court and alternative institutions. Our findings confirm that with higher public support, courts can move the opinion of citizens to both legitimize and de‐legitimize a policy. This effect can be found at the aggregate level for a court enjoying higher public support, but also at the individual level for respondents with higher trust in the court. Interestingly, courts can even move the opinion of citizens with strong prior attitudes in the opposite direction, if these citizens highly trust the court. These findings have implications beyond the study itself. First, they confirm that the legitimacy‐conferring effect can also be observed for European courts, not only for the US Supreme Court. Second, they show that the relevance of a mechanism identified for a single case, like the US Supreme Court, might only hold for specific conditions. As public support for courts strongly varies across countries in Europe, we also expect the impact of any mechanism relying on public support to strongly vary, as we can observe in our own analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Law and politics scholarship has been preoccupied with judicialization of politics, often treated as a linear, intensifying trend. This article, however, argues that the rise of populism, particularly East-Central European authoritarian populism, has brought new dialectical dynamics to the judicialization narrative. I examine the relationship between the populist rule and the judicialized structure of governance, and revisit the judicialization theories by providing a conceptual toolkit for analysing the populist backlash against judicialization. The populist ideology suggests that populists should seek de-judicialization. Analysis of Hungarian and Polish cases, however, shows that populists combine different short- and long-term strategies seeking de-judicialization of politics and extreme politicisation of the judiciary, subject to the scope of populists' power and developments in time. Consequently, constitutional courts captured by populists are not always muted. They can be actively exploited for advancing the government's agenda. These measures affect the judicialized triadic structure of governance, normally consisting of the government, the opposition, and an impartial constitutional court. Depending on the techniques employed, the populist court-curbing can lead to a partial return to the dyadic structure, deformation of the triadic structure, and, in the long-term, to the 'charade' triadic structure turning the constitutional court into an inferior actor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

If populists capture the constitutional court, the system of separation of powers will change. The constitutional court does not act as a counterweight to the ruling majority but rather as a tool for the ruling majority itself to advance its interests. This article unpacks this aspect of populist constitutionalism, which I referred to as the instrumental abuse of constitutional courts. Most importantly, it presents and analyses five different techniques by which populists can abuse the constitutional court as an instrument against opposition. These techniques are the 'governing, do not disturb' technique, consisting in not quashing unconstitutional acts; the legitimation technique, through which populists justify their actions; the delegation technique, through which populists shift responsibility for potentially unpopular actions to the constitutional court; the outright counter-opposition technique, through which populists can achieve the liquidation of their opponents; and the extra-legal technique, involving the use of the authority of judges in the media. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper takes some statistics of judicial decisions on action of protection presented in Colombia in 2021. With respect to these decisions, the article tests the independence of the second instance decision (appellate court) with respect to what was decided by the first instance judge. Based on these results, the paper proposes a modification of the rule under which such actions of protection should be selected for review by the Constitutional Court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1991, a new constitution was created to include all political stakeholders in addition to those traditionally excluded in the 1886 constitution, in the hope of putting an end to armed conflicts, strikes and citizen discontent. These citizen demonstrations were capitalized by the students in the seventh ballot, which prompted the convocation of the constituent assembly. After the promulgation of the new constitution of 1991, a cascade of reforms began, which evidenced a constant dispute for power between the elites, emerging legal and illegal groups, and the population that began to feel part of the power. But, what was the purpose of these constitutional changes? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyzes the power to make regulations conferred to the Spanish General Council of the Judiciary from the first of its Organic Laws to the present. To do so, we examine the laws that have regulated this issue over the years, since 1980 until the last most important reform, the Organic Law 4/2013, the regulations approved by the General Council of the Judiciary and the judgments handed down by the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper studies the Constitutional Court's manifestations of self-restraint, that is, those areas in which, within the margin granted by the Constitution and the law, the Court has shown deference to the actions of the judicial bodies, seeking to draw the perimeter that is proper to its actions. There are some cases in which, if we speak of self-restraint, it would be in an improper sense because deference to the ordinary jurisdiction is a normative requirement of the Constitutional Court Act (LOTC). In other areas, which we could call self-restraint proper, the self-limitation is expressed in constructions of the Constitutional Court itself, without prejudice to the fact that they are ultimately anchored in the position that the Constitution reserves for the Constitutional Court, the ordinary jurisdiction, and the Supreme Court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The courts ought to be active players during the pandemic crisis to prevent the abuse of power, enhance the quality of the measures taken and their communication and contribute to increasing their legitimacy. The paper focuses on the Czech Constitutional Court and the Supreme Administrative Court (together with regional administrative courts) and assesses whether they lived up to this role. We found that the Constitutional Court was a passive player, which resulted from insufficient procedural legal norms and a formalistic approach by the court itself. On the other hand, the Supreme Administrative Court was - mainly due to a special procedural framework - an active player. Its case law has a real impact and prevents the executive power from making some faults, such as an obvious lack of legal basis or clearly insufficient reasoning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explains the RLD corpus, a collection of cases where the "Jueces del Supremo" (Lords and Ladies Justices) of the Spanish High Court and the Constitutional Court have turned to Spanish dictionaries and grammar as a source of linguistic authority to write court judgments. The four main stages followed in the creation of the corpus, (i) design, (ii) implementation, (iii) revision and (iv) publication, are thoroughly explained. The aim of this corpus, which includes 1,940 court judgments issued between the years 2012 and 2018, is to provide a representative and empirically adequate sample of data of the use of dictionaries and grammar as a source of linguistic authority in Spanish jurisprudence. This corpus fills a gap in language and law studies: on the one hand, the lack of large shared corpora of legal texts, available for any researcher or research group interested in this issue, and, on the other hand, the need to analyze empirically the use of dictionaries and grammar in the court judgments of the Spanish High Court and the Constitutional Court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The medical pandemic COVID-19 represents not only a problem of a medical nature, but also of a legal approach. The states were not prepared for such situations, and the limited knowledge of the causes and evolution of the disease, determined an atypical legislative approach, bordering on the violation of fundamental human rights. The article presents the legislative situation of the state of emergency existing before the pandemic, then critically analyzes the legislative interventions at the national level. The important decisions of the Constitutional Court in the matter of legislation during the pandemic were analyzed, also showing how the courts reacted. A component of the study presents the doctrinal positions in the matter, as well as proposals for improving the regulation. The medical pandemic COVID-19 found the Romanian state unprepared, both in the medical component and in the legal component. With a normative act establishing the state of emergency precariously adopted, during a situation of democratic crisis, beyond the constitutional requirements, Romanian institutions have improvised, trying to create the appearance of science, of understanding the phenomenon and of effective care for the rights and freedoms of the citizen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The research aims to study the court ruling that Article (198) “Transvestitism” of Penal Code No. (16 of 1960), as amended by law No. (36 of 2007) is unconstitutional and commenting thereof. The research used a mixture of descriptive, analytical and comparative approaches because it fits the study content and achieves its objectives. The important findings were that Islam forbade Transvestitism and stated its provisions. As for law, it criminalized the act and stated the punishment rule only, and it stipulates the criminalization of every form of Transvestitism generally without detail. The Constitutional Court has justified unconstitutionality of Article (198) for the text didn’t contain a disciplined objective criterion to be considered in determining that legally sinful act, and to ensure that ignorance of it does not lead to a breach of rights guaranteed by the constitution, although the law continues to criminalize any act that violates modesty, including Transvestitism. The law reduces the judges’ authority to abide by the law text. While Islamic Sharia has grand judges the authority of estimating realizing crimes and discretionary penalties. The law, before ruling unconstitutional was sound, and the mischiefs resulting from unconstitutionality are greater than keeping it in its old formulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The existence of a constitutional control is the essential cornerstone in any democratic system. Without a constitutional justice it is impossible to maintain a pluralist democracy with a real rule of law. The Tunisian constitutional history is emblematic of the relevance of the constitutional review. This article outlines the difficult and hampered life of the Tunisian constitutional justice that crossed two authoritarian regimes: a "revolution"; and the transition to democracy. It is in the latter phase that the creation of the constitutional court proved to be the paramount element in the passage from a procedural democracy to a substantive democracy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Indonesia is a state of law. As a state of law, all aspects of social, national and state life, including government, must always be based on law. This study aims to determine the process of testing the Indonesian state law by carrying out procedural law. This research method is normative legal research (library) and sociological legal research (empirical). This journal discusses the procedural process in filing a Judicial Review at the Constitutional Court, including the important stages that must be considered in submitting an application. When viewed from the point of view of the teachings of trias politica, it is in order to provide protection and enforcement of human rights in the context of democracy and democratic law enforcement or a democratic state that has a constitutional basis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this work we hold that, aside from external influences, the Constitutional Court's own actions can have a great impact on its politicized image. Precisely for this reason, they can also be an important part of the solution to that problem. To illustrate our thesis we show first of all some examples in which the Court presents modes or characteristics of a political body, moving away from the function that has been constitutionally assigned to it. Subsequently, we suggest some measures that can be adopted from within the body to better fulfil this function, which is the reason of its existence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of the Article is to clarify, if the Slovak constitutional system contains constitution based on material core. Were there any important changes dealing with this constitutional concept? The purpose of this paper is to offer an answer to the questions by outlining a short overview of constitutional development especially in the field of discovering the material core of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic and its turbulent development. One of the used perspectives is a COVID 19 crisis perspective and its influence upon material core of constitution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study departs from the assumption that the Arab judicial systems in general are infused by the Egyptian judicial system, as it is one of the most ancient and deep-rooted systems in the Arab World. Not surprisingly, the Egyptian courts had been one of the first in the Arab region to review the legitimacy of the Arab parliaments after the "Arab Spring" as it is known in the Arab media. Arguing this, the most apparent example on this assumption is the decision of the Supreme Constitutional Court to dissolve the Egyptian Parliament in post-January 2011 Revolution. Arguably, the dissolution of the Egyptian parliament represents a judicial precedent for several other Arab jurisdictions including the Palestinian one, to follow the Egyptian courts. This claim is derived from the fact that the Palestinian judicial system has borrowed many judicial precedents from the Egyptian courts. Furthermore, the Egyptian law-men had played a significant role in designing the legal and judicial systems, starting with drafting the Palestinian Basic Law, and not finishing by drafting the Law No. (3) of 2006 of the Supreme Constitutional Court. This implies that the Egyptian legal and judicial jurisdictions have impacted on the outcomes of Palestinian judicial system in general, and the constitutional review in particular. Potentially, the similarities between the dissolution of the Egyptian and the Palestinian parliaments – despite different reasons – supports this argument. In fact, the dissolvement of the parliamentary institutions represented a new phenomenon in the Arab politics, especially because there are several Arab constitutional courts overruled the elected parliaments in the aftermath of Bo'zizi's Tunisian revolution. The dissolvement decisions had been deemed by many observers a counter revolution against the change movement that dominated the Arab nations. Hence, it has been demanding for many law scholars to examine this phenomenon, and find out the reasons and justifications that motivated the Arab judges to take such decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article aims to present in detail a recent and peculiar Italian case concerning the approval of the law of the Valle d’Aosta region n. 11, December, 2020, with which that region tried to bypass the State powers to manage the pandemic caused by Covid-19 and provide its citizens with alternative regulations. In particular, in addition to the contents of the regional law and the context in which it was inserted, this paper aims to analyse the reaction of the Constitutional Court to the State recourse to Law 11/2020. In addition to causing the first precautionary suspension of a regional law in the history of the Republic, the contents of this recent decision of the Constitutional Court have been recognised as transcendent by the doctrine, and extend far beyond the specific case, to serve even as a field of study and inquiry for other regional systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There was no tradition of a republican president in Hungary before the fall of communism, and the transitory constitution of 1989 was unclear about the exact role the President should play in the constitutional system of Hungary. Some provisions even resembled those of presidential or semi-presidential systems; some ambiguities were clarified during the first two decades after the transition. Conventions, however, were established to some extent and sometimes very quickly. This period gave rise to guidelines as to how the powers of the President should be exercised. Some other powers were concretized and interpreted foremost by the Constitutional Court. These conventions and judicial interpretations formed the character of the Presidency to the extent of informal constitutional change. Some of these elements have even been incorporated into and formalized by the new Fundamental Law of Hungary. The present contribution will point out how the originally broad competencies of the President have been narrowed in the practice, and what role the Constitutional Court and political actors played in this process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the Czech context, the issue of same-sex partnerships can be viewed as a "hot potato". After long political debates, a law allowing civil unions was adopted in 2006. In the post-communist area, there has been a political struggle over the marriage. The Czech Constitutional Court recently published two key decisions that moved this debate forward. At the same time, two major legislative bills were tabled in the Chamber of Deputies: the first extending marriage to non-heterosexual couples, the second preserving the current status quo with regard to marriage. In the article, we explain these recent Czech legal events in the broader context of the perception of marriage in the post-communist area. We argue that if the Court decides in the future on the constitutionality of same-sex marriages, it should take into account the principles of human dignity and the best interest of the child. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]