Search

Observed from a wider historical perspective, the most recent period of the constitutional life of the United States of America risks to be remembered as the one during which the presidential impeachment procedure was used incomparably more often than ever before. This sometimes attracts particular attention to the topic of criminal responsibility of the President, on which the Constitution itself remains silent. At the same time, legislation and jurisprudence seem to have been shying away from addressing this important and rather actual issue. The question whether the presidential immunity protects a sitting or a former president from arrest, trial, or punishment for deeds committed during the presidential term of office thus represents a particularly complex legal puzzler. This is particularly the case since the traditional checks-and-balances system appears to be displaying signs of weakness due to an overtly politicized procedure, notably in the absence of firm legal guidelines or clear theoretical perspectives.

By reviewing and analyzing the solutions contained in the reference constitutions of European countries, the author tries to systematize forms of irregular circumstances that are regulated at the constitutional level. A grouping was observed in models according to which there are general provisions on irregular circumstances, as well as those that contain provisions that are individually dedicated to the state of emergency, war and natural disaster. The rule that refers to the general frequency of mutual borrowing of solutions in the constitutions of European countries does not deviate significantly even in the area of regulation of irregular situations. The structure and normative systematics of constitutional acts often indicate whether the author of the constitution pays equal attention to different forms of irregular circumstances, as well as whether he treats them together or separately. Constitutions establish the basis for declaring individual forms of irregular circumstances, as well as entities authorized to make decisions on their introduction and abolition. Restrictions on human rights and basic freedoms are an important topic in constitutional regulation that has points of contact with the irregular situation, and the authors of the paper have given special attention to them.

The state of emergency which lasted for almost two years represents an unprecedented event in the constitutional history of the French Fifth Republic. In addition to being characterized by unduly long, it also debilitated judicial and parliamentary mechanism for scrutiny of the president's powers, as well as those of police and security forces. At the same time, the executive has shown a tendency to exert scope of authority in the manner that is excessive in comparison to its constitutionally designed emergency prerogatives. Additionally, fundamental individual rights, and not only those contained in rules on guarantees of fair criminal procedure, have suffered limitations that are not easily justifiable by the need to protect the highest values of the Republic. This article is dedicated to examining the introduction of legal and factual conditions for the potential long-term disturbance of some of the basic components of the constitutional order of France.

In December 2023, another extraordinary parliamentary election was held in the Republic of Serbia, the fourth in the last decade. Serbia has held no less than thirteen general elections since the multiparty system was introduced in 1990, with only three of them not being extraordinary. The aftermath of almost every early election consisted of the same dominant political party staying on power. This implies that almost every extraordinary election aimed at political capitalization on the status of current executive power-holder. In addition, this type of election is often held simultaneously with local elections. This cannot easily be regarded as a welcome democratic procedure. Resorting to untimely dissolution of the National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia may be assessed as a tool of expressing the dominant position of the executive in relation to the National Assembly. According to the frontal provision of its Constitution, Serbia is based on the rule of law, and it is committed to European principles and values. Another constitutional provision clearly determines that the duration of the term of a legislature is four years. However, caretaker governments, with much restricted legitimacy, appear to have become an objectionable rule rather than an exception. It seems to be quite unusual for a candidate state for membership in the European Union to hold so many elections earlier than constitutionally scheduled. While the practice is not formally endangering Serbia's negotiations with the EU, relevant reports presented by the European Commission, the OSCE, and the Venice Commission express concern in this regard. In one of the reports, adopted in December 2022, it is recommended that the Serbian Constitution should be interpreted in such a way that a legitimate limitation of periodical recourse to early elections is enabled. In this paper, method of comparative normative analysis of legal framework of extraordinary parliamentary elections held throughout Europe is used, as well as method of analyzing comments and recommendations of competent European political and legal authorities. After the introductory part, the survey of Serbian legal framework envisaging possibilities for dissolving the National Assembly is presented. This part is followed by the analysis of the history of early dissolutions of the National Assembly. In the fourth part, comments and recommendations on Serbian snap elections of various European bodies are examined. In conclusive part of the paper, normative suggestions are laid out in order to curtail the possibly unconstitutional practice of arbitrary dissolution of the National Assembly. These are coupled with recommendations aiming at fostering a stable practice of protecting full-term legislative periods from frequent obstructions by the executive branch of power, since opportunistic parliamentary election timing appear to represent an indirect assault on the rule of law and on the separation of powers in Serbia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article has the purpose to examine the typical content of the preamble of modern constitutional documents, as well as to underline the catalogue of functions a constituonal preamble may have. Since preambles tend to serve to fulfil both legal and extra-legal tasks, it is of particular interest to remind the reader of possible legal effects of preambles in comparative constitutional law, especially in the field of constitutional interpretation (by competent judicial bodies). Therefore, preambles may help to give a specific meaning to certain legal notions contained in the so-called operative (directly applicable) norms of constitutions. However, some preambular texts seem much anachronistic, i.e. they provide little help in interpreting a constitution, or giving meaningful aid in nonconflictual application of its norms. This does not only apply to religious discours or manifestly political phrases that may occupy the wording of a preamble. Other type of content may be helpful in promoting the protection of individual rights, rule of law, or international legal cooperation. It may be concluded, however, that the results of the comparative methodology used in the article suggest that preambles usually provide a useful tool in explaining (reading) the constitution, even if which often happens to be the case their content is not easily explainable (readable). The analysis includes numerous positive national constitutional texts adopted throughout the world.