scholarly journals Structure of the Constitutional Courts in Comparative Law: Macedonia, Turkey, Germany, Austria, France, Italy and Spain

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ebru Karaman
Keyword(s):  
Working Condition ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Employee Rights ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
The Status ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms

When the legislative has delimited rights and freedoms illegally, Constitutional Court should step in as an efficient assurance and this forcefulness is undoubtedly related to the structure of the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Court's organization and election of the members of the Constitutional Court and status have a great importance for freedom of the Court. As a matter of fact, the only way to protect people’s fundamental rights and freedoms is possible with independent verdict. Judiciary which fulfills the function of judgment behalf of the nation and the judges who hold the judicial power, have an indispensable importance. The assurance of people’s right and freedoms could be provided only, when the court has accomplished their mission away from all kinds of pressure and influence. The freedom of judges also means their appointments, employee rights and working condition therefore; in first place, the organization of the Turkish Constitutional Court (General Assembly, Department, Division, Commission), then the election of members of the Turkish Constitutional Court and the status are compared with the regulation of Macedonia, Germany, Austria, France, Italy and Spain.

9. European Union law and institutions

2021 ◽  
pp. 124-141
Author(s):  
Colin Faragher
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Law ◽  
Cooperation Agreement ◽  
The Status ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Eu

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter discusses the Treaty framework and sources of EU law as well as the institutions of the EU. It covers the legal background to the UK’s departure from the EU, the legal process through which the UK left the EU, the key provisions of the EU–UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (2020), and the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020. This chapter also discusses the effect of the UK’s departure from the EU on the status of the sources of EU law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms as well as failure to transpose a Directive into national law and the effect of leaving the EU on the Francovich principle.

Constitutional Court and Constitutional Review in Albania

ICL Journal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brunilda Bara ◽  
Jonad Bara
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Historical Changes ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
Legal Writers

AbstractThis article tends to give an insight on the historical and institutional develop­ment of the Constitutional Court of Albania, on the need of the society and the historical changes that led to its creation.It focuses especially on the role and competences of this Court on the protection of the rule of law, of the constitutional principles, on the balancing and division of powers, on the protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals. Its aim is to provide overall information on the functioning and standards it follows.It is based on the jurisprudence of this Court during the years and is enriched by its deci­sions on particular subjects and compares this Court to other similar ones in Eastern Euro­pean countries.The article is mainly directed to scholars and legal writers whose aim is to compare the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court of Albania to other similar courts.

scholarly journals Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terhadap Pembubaran Partai Politik Di Indonesia

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-239
Author(s):  
Hasir Budiman Ritonga
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
Party Members ◽  
The Republic

Judicial power in Indonesia under the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia shall be exercised by the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. One of the authority of the Constitutional Court according to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia is to decide the dissolution of political parties. The facts in the current Indonesian system of ketatanegaran no cases of political parties that were dissolved through the decision of the Constitutional Court, it's just that the problem is when the Constitutional Court uses its authority to break the dissolution of political parties there are things that are formal juridically there is no clear rules, such as the legal status of party members who are not directly involved in the violation committed by the party and the status of party members who hold the position of members of the legislature both at the center and in the regions. So for that must be resolved by emphasizing the certainty, justice and benefit in the decision of the constitutional court

scholarly journals An Expanding Meaning of Presidential Amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 43-52
Author(s):  
A. A. Uvarov
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Local Population ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Public Power ◽  
Constitutional Amendments ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms

The paper deals with the issues of interconnectedness and the role of constitutional amendments introduced by the President of the Russian Federation to the current Constitution of the Russian Federation on January 20, 2020. In assessing the meaning and content of a great deal of amendments to Chapter 3 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the author concludes that they have additional, however, sometimes more important value in the context of the hierarchy of constitutional norms, which is directly related to the chapters of the Constitution that are not subject to any revision. Despite the formal inalterability, the foundations of the constitutional order have in fact as a result of the amendments gained such new provisions as: “the stateconstituing people that is a part of the multinational union of equal peoples of the Russian Federation”; “ban on alienation of a part of the territory of the Russian Federation and calls for such actions”; “non-enforcement of decisions of interstate bodies adopted on the basis of the provisions of international agreements of the Russian Federation in their interpretation contrary to the Constitution of the Russian Federation”; “the state guarantee of minimum wage not less than the minimum living wage of the working population.” The rules governing certain fundamental rights and freedoms of man and citizen (art. 37–39, 44 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation) have been supplemented with new content without being formally altered. Ambivalence of local self-government leading to opposition between local and state authorities, partly resulting from the provision of Article 12 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation concerning the autonomy of local self-government bodies. Their failure to enter the system of public authorities is partially minimized by the provision on their unity in the system of public power. However, many, and at first glance minor, amendments to Chapter 8 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation significantly reduce the potential of power for the local population, turn the constituent rules concerning its powers to the reference rule. The conclusion draws attention to some issues in the activity of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on the implementation of these constitutional amendments.

scholarly journals Democracy and (the essential content of) fundamental rights: marching in line or precarious balancing act?

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Schaks
Keyword(s):  
South African ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Potential Conflict ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
German Parliament

ABSTRACT This article addresses the question of how democracy and fundamental rights interplay, and compares German and South African law for this purpose. The author argues that democracy requires and presupposes fundamental rights, but that these two values do not always align, and then deals with the question of how to reconcile democracy and fundamental rights in case of conflict. The potential conflict between the two values is sometimes reflected in the relationship between Parliaments as the embodiment of democracy and the Constitutional Courts as the embodiments of fundamental rights (the so- called "counter-majoritarian dilemma"). However, the author rejects the recent critique by some scholars that the German Federal Constitutional Court structurally exceeds its powers vis-a-vis the German Parliament and that there is a permanent judicial overreach. On the contrary, the author argues that Constitutional Courts do not have sufficient tools to counter a democratic backsliding, i.e. the incremental erosion of democracy. Since the author considers democratic backsliding to be a greater and more acute threat to democracy than judicial overreach, he presents the view that the guarantee of the essential content of a right delineates the minimum of a fundamental right in a democratic society. This view is explained using freedom of expression as example. Keywords: German Constitution, Grundgesetz, Constitutional comparison, Essential content of a right, Freedom of expression, Separation of powers, Democratic backsliding, Counter-majoritarian dilemma, Constitutional courts, Democracy, Fundamental rights, Preconditions of democracy

scholarly journals Referencing International Human Rights Law In Indonesian Constitutional Adjudication

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 249
Author(s):  
Bisariyadi Bisariyadi
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
Human Rights Law ◽  
International Human Rights ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Human ◽  
Constitutional Adjudication

The power of the Indonesian Constitutional Court to review laws is a constitutional adjudication process. It is a forum to resolve constitutional issues where a citizen can challenge Law that has injured his rights. The Court's reasoning provides audiences with the debates for its deliberation. Audiences may find reference to the international human rights law. It is an interesting practice. However, there is no studies yet about the information on the statistic of the Court made reference to international human rights law. As such, this study aims to identify reference to international human rights law in the Court's decision on judicial review cases from 2003 to 2016. Additionally, this study also aims to answer the question of what underlies the Court to made reference to international human rights law. As many studies show, the objective of Constitutional Court's references to the international human rights law is to strengthen constitutional rights protection. Nonetheless, the Court did not pay any interests to the global agenda of transnational constitutionalism or a convergence of rights and legal pluralism. The article is divided into 5 (five) sections, commencing with the introduction. The second part discusses the status of international human rights law in Indonesia. As the third presents information on Court's decision which cited international human rights law. Then, the fourth presents typical function of the decision that made reference to international human rights law. It concluded that the practice of referring to international law demonstrates the open attitude of Indonesian constitutional justices to the universal nature of fundamental rights.

scholarly journals Expression of opinion through Acts. A brief analysis of the Hungarian Constitutional Courts practice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Szabolcs Stock
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The aim of the article is to present how one can excercise their freedom of expression through acts. I focus ont the decisions of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, the European Court of Human Rights and the U. S. Supreme court. I analyze these decisions, and compare the fundamental rights that can collide, such as freedom of expression versus the right to property, which one should prevail when they come into collision. I also study how one can decide, whether the act should fall within the protected circle of the freedom of expression, or it should be penalized as a crime, or misdemeanor.

scholarly journals Scope and Exercise of the Exclusive Competences of the Member States of the European Union

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 23-46
Author(s):  
Edyta Anna Krzysztofik
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Member States ◽  
Federal Constitutional ◽  
Uniform Manner ◽  
Constitutional Identity ◽  
The Eu

The process of European integration has introduced the Member States into a new legal reality. The existing exclusivity in the area of competence implementation has been replaced by a two-stage model of their exercise. The Member States, when conferring part of their supervisory powers, did not specify the scope of their own competences. The so-called European clauses were analysed in the Constitutions of selected Member States, which showed that they define the recipient of the conferral and, in a non-uniform manner, specify the subject of the conferral.  The analysis of the indicated provisions clearly shows that the Constitutions of the Member States exclude full conferral of competences on the European Union. There is no specification of the scope of competences that may be conferred. However, this issue was addressed by Constitutional Courts of the Member States. The article refers to the judgements of the German Federal Constitutional Court and the Polish Constitutional Court. It has been shown that they equate exclusive competences of the Member States with the scope of the concept of constitutional identity reduced to basic principles of the state. The Court of Justice of the European Union analysed the scope of competences of both entities. The article presents the analysis of judgements on: entries in Civil Registry regarding transcription of surnames, the issue of recognition of same-sex marriages, reform of the judiciary system in Poland, and the application of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the areas that do not fall under EU competence. Regardless of the division of competences, the EU is bound by the principle of respect for national identity of the Member States, including constitutional identity. It both obligates the EU to respect the exclusive competences of the Member States and is a premise restricting the achievement of EU objectives.

scholarly journals Die Wandlung des Grundrechtsschutzes durch das Bundesverfassungsgericht – Recht auf Vergessen I und II als „Solange III“?

2019 ◽  
Vol 102 (4) ◽  
pp. 277-292
Author(s):  
Rainer Hofmann ◽  
Alexander Heger ◽  
Tamara Gharibyan
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Level System ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
German Constitution ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between the fundamental rights as laid down in the German Constitution and the fundamental rights contained in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has been exceedingly conflict-prone ever since the early days of the European Union. Related thereto is the ongoing controversy on the judicial prerogative of the German Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfG) within that system. Thus, two big players in the European multi level system, i.e. the BVerfG and the European Court of Justice (ECJ), clash with their judicial powers and diverging interests. With its two recent decisions, 1 BvR 16/13 and 1 BvR 276/17 of November 6, 2019, the First Senate of the BVerfG introduced a far-reaching change in its approach of protecting basic rights by clarifying the relationship between the EU fundamental rights and the fundamental rights of the German Constitution. At the same time, the BVerfG has made a strong effort to maintain its position within the multilevel cooperation of the constitutional courts of EU member states, particularly in relation to the ECJ, which by both sides is referred to as a "cooperative relationship". This article explains the repercussions of the aforementioned judgments on the protection of fundamental rights in the European multi-level system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document