The Constitution of the Slovak Republic distinguishes among the constitution, its amendments and constitutional laws. The change in the constitution is made by means of constitutional laws. In specialized literature the question has risen whether the distinction between the constitution and constitutional laws does not imply the hierarchic relationship between the said types of legal regulations. Some authors have deducted from it different legal consequences for the applicability of the constitutional law, where the constitution is not changed directly by its amendment, but indirectly through an alone-standing constitutional law. The author of this article rejects this view, particularly with regard to the need to draw a distinction between legal norms at the level of the Constitutional Code and their formal expression through the constitutional law. He also points out to the defectiveness of the legal opinion that derives the hierarchic relationship referred to above from Article 152 (4) of the Constitution. On the contrary, the article deals with negative trends from the view of the recent practice of the National Council, consisting in the adoption of constitutional laws regulating in detail the partial areas of the law, which leads to the circumvention of the rules of protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms guaranteed by the constitution against their infringement on the part of the public authorities. Together with adoption of ad hoc constitutional laws, the author regards the said phenomena as unacceptable interventions into the Constitutional Order.