On the (in)compatibility of the Authentic Interpretation of the Law in Croatian Law with the Principles of Separation of Powers and Rule of Law: A View through the Prism of Constitutional Judicial Practice

Abstract

Bearing in mind that the Croatian Constitutional Court recently abolished the provisions on the authentic interpretation of the law, and considering the fact that it is a legal institute which raised a number of criticisms among the scientific and professional public and resulted in opposite positions of the Croatian Constitutional Court on the question of its constitutionality, the paper examines the issue of (in)compatibility of that legal institute with the constitutional principles of separation of powers and rule of law. To this end, the stated principles are examined by using relevant literature and constitutional judicial practice, while the practice of the Croatian Constitutional Court on (un)constitutionality of authentic interpretation is examined by considering the content of its decisions, with reference to certain examples from comparative constitutional judicial practice. It was concluded that giving an authentic interpretation, until its abolition, was in accordance with the principle of the separation of powers as long as such interpretation was not related to a specific court case and that it was in accordance with the principle of the rule of law as long as such an interpretation was not applied to those cases that had already become resolved.