The Extension of the Jurisdiction of Constitutional Court in Assessing the Constitutional Amendments – the Case of Slovakia and Kosovo

Q2 Social Sciences
Luz Balaj, Florent Muçaj
{"title":"The Extension of the Jurisdiction of Constitutional Court in Assessing the Constitutional Amendments – the Case of Slovakia and Kosovo","authors":"Luz Balaj, Florent Muçaj","doi":"10.2478/iclr-2020-0027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary This paper examines the jurisprudence of the constitutional courts of Slovakia and Kosovo regarding their assessment of the constitutionality of constitutional amendments. The rationale for the selected countries stands behind the practices of their Constitutional Courts of, in terms of the jurisdiction expansion in assessing constitutional amendments. Considering the fact that these courts have been recently established, the Slovak Constitutional Court with the Constitution of 1992 and the Constitutional Court of Kosovo with the Constitution of 2008, it is the purpose of this paper to further analyze their initial work in assessing the constitutionality of constitutional amendments in the light of the impact of the German jurisprudence. Regardless the lack of experience in this regard, these courts have shown an interesting correlation between scientific doctrines and jurisprudences, which have served the judges to justify their decisions. In this direction, this paper frames its discussion in two key segments. Firstly, is the manner in which these courts have expanded their jurisdiction, an expansion that provided an assess to the constitutionality of constitutional amendments that goes beyond confronting the amendment with the explicit nature of the unamendability of the constitution. Secondly, on the impact of the German jurisprudence, especially in the case of the Slovak Constitutional court.","PeriodicalId":36722,"journal":{"name":"International and Comparative Law Review","volume":"20 1","pages":"239 - 253"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International and Comparative Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/iclr-2020-0027","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Summary This paper examines the jurisprudence of the constitutional courts of Slovakia and Kosovo regarding their assessment of the constitutionality of constitutional amendments. The rationale for the selected countries stands behind the practices of their Constitutional Courts of, in terms of the jurisdiction expansion in assessing constitutional amendments. Considering the fact that these courts have been recently established, the Slovak Constitutional Court with the Constitution of 1992 and the Constitutional Court of Kosovo with the Constitution of 2008, it is the purpose of this paper to further analyze their initial work in assessing the constitutionality of constitutional amendments in the light of the impact of the German jurisprudence. Regardless the lack of experience in this regard, these courts have shown an interesting correlation between scientific doctrines and jurisprudences, which have served the judges to justify their decisions. In this direction, this paper frames its discussion in two key segments. Firstly, is the manner in which these courts have expanded their jurisdiction, an expansion that provided an assess to the constitutionality of constitutional amendments that goes beyond confronting the amendment with the explicit nature of the unamendability of the constitution. Secondly, on the impact of the German jurisprudence, especially in the case of the Slovak Constitutional court.
宪法法院管辖权在宪法修正案评估中的延伸——以斯洛伐克和科索沃为例
本文件审查了斯洛伐克和科索沃宪法法院关于评估宪法修正案合宪性的判例。选定国家的理由支持其宪法法院在评估宪法修正案时扩大管辖权的做法。考虑到这些法院是最近成立的,斯洛伐克宪法法院和科索沃宪法法院分别于1992年和2008年成立,本文的目的是根据德国判例的影响,进一步分析它们在评估宪法修正案合宪性方面的初步工作。尽管缺乏这方面的经验,但这些法院在科学学说和法学之间表现出了有趣的相关性,这为法官的裁决提供了理由。在这个方向上,本文将其讨论分为两个关键部分。首先,是这些法院扩大管辖权的方式,这种扩大提供了对宪法修正案合宪性的评估,而不仅仅是以宪法不可修改的明确性质来对抗修正案。第二,关于德国判例的影响,特别是在斯洛伐克宪法法院的案件中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信