Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Constitutional Court,
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
In the light of art. 188 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland The Constitutional Court adjudicates on the compliance of laws and other normative acts with the Constitution. The interpretation of law in accordance with the Constitution has been a key issue since the beginning of the jurisprudential activity of Polish Constitutional Court. It is stressed on the ground of the American doctrine that the problem of interpreting law in line with the constitution raises the need to compare the content of a controlled act with its constitutive pattern. This type of interpretation was defined as an interpretation in harmony with the Constitution. In American constitutionalism two concepts of constitutional interpretation can be distinguish: Living Constitution and Originalism. Nowadays, one can see the emergence of the third way of interpreting the constitution which allows to eliminate the shortcomings of the two mentioned above. This concept, referred to as Non Originalism (or Living Originalism). The model of judicial review was adopted in the USA whereas the model of the constitutional court was introduced in Europe. Austria is widely regarded as the cradle of constitutional judiciary. Hans Kelsen designed a system of constitutional review. He provided the Constitutional Court with the power to scrutinize abstractly the legality of legal acts in terms of their compliance with the Constitution. It was not until the 1960s that the so-called interpretation of laws in accordance with the Constitution appeared in the case-law of this body. The cataclysm of fascism and Nazism ruined constitutional theories based on the primacy of the constitutional law. As the founders of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany of May 23, 1949 were conscious of that, they adopted the solutions of the Austrian model whose essence was the examination of the conformity of legal acts with the constitution. The discussion on the correct methods of interpreting the constitution is the “Archimedes point” of constitutional law. The activity of the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany and the achievements of the constitutional law in this country had the greatest influence on Polish judicial practice. The Polish name of this institution is a translation of the German term fervassungskonforme Auslegung von Gesetzen.
EN
The current article considers the evolution of an institution of constitutional justice as a fundamental democratic value based on the analysis of national legislation and its experience in the real social and political life of Uzbekistan. It reveals the elements of access to constitutional and judicial protection, its limits and conditions for its implementation, including the interpretation of the normative content of constitutional rights as a subject of constitutional judicial protection of human rights and freedoms. The article discusses the problems that occur in practice in the process of implementation of these functions by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Uzbekistan and recommendations for their improvement.
EN
The constitutional complaint is a means to protect constitutional rights, as well as being the core element of a state governed by the rule of law. It was introduced into the Latvian legal system only in 2001, which is five years after the establishment of the Constitutional Court. A constitutional complaint is of great importance since not only does it protect fundamental human rights, but also guarantees the public interest. Although the Baltic States share many historical, social, formal and political similarities, there are many differences in the precise legal solutions and institutions. Thus, the possibility of filing a Constitutional complaint is recognised only in the Latvian legal system. While in Estonia a person has a limited direct access to the Supreme Court and Lithuania is merely considering its introduction.
EN
The article considers the issues concerning the binding nature of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court. The author conludes that the legal positions of the Constitutional Court are mandatory for all the state and local self-government bodies, their officials, as well as for the natural and legal persons in the whole territory of the Republic of Armenia. Moreover, not only the noted subjects, but also the Constitutional Court itself is bound by them, though these legal positions can be changed in case of existence of corresponding bases. In any case, while making the mentioned changes one should take into account the main key for the effective solution of the discussed issue – finding balance between the continuity and predictability of the practice of the Constitutional Court and the values, underlying the development of the constitutional doctrine, in each concrete situation, accompanied with the observance of the principle of “expedient self-restraint” by the Constitutional Court.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.