Constitutional Court

1. Models of Constitutional Adjudication

1.1. HistoryThe most important means of defence of the Constitution, BUT after constitutional State- English absolute parlamentary sovereignty: NOT- French democracy-conception: only Conseil Const.

- Firstly: American checks and balances – The Federalist (1788), Marbury v. Madison (1803)

1.2. Decentralized (American) model

- US, Scandinavian, Swiss, Estonian

1.3. Centralized (European) model

- (1920), Germany, Spain, Portugal, post-communist countries

- Special: French Const. Council, UK Human Rights Act (1998)

2. Establishment of Hungarian Constitutional Court

• German model, BUT

- mainly abstract norm-control + actio popularis

- restricted constitutional complaint

• Is the Hungarian Constitutional Court „the most powerful” in the world?

2.1. Organization

- one or more chambers?

- number of judges: 5, 10, (15), 11

- nomination, election, re-election

- plenary session, councils of three judges

2.2. Procedure

- rules of procedure (own vs. parlamentary standing orders)

- restriction to motion – order 42/1998 AB

- procedure ex officio

- presidential authority - signing

- contradictorial procedure

3. Jurisdiction

3.1. Abstract norm-control3.1.1. Preliminary norm-control

- inquiry of bills (50 MPs, committee)- DECISION 16/1991 AB – self-restraintcontrol before final voting - DECISION 50/1997 AB

abolishment of inquiry of bills – DECISION 66/1997 AB

- stay: preliminary review of standing orders of the Parliament + international treaties

- constitutional veto of the President of the Republic

3.1.2. Subsequent norm-control

- everybody – actio popularis

- against legal norms (except Constitution) + international treaties (DECISION 4/1997 AB)

- annulment: ex nunc, ex tunc, pro futuro + „temporary measures” (Bokros-packet)

3.1.3. Concrete norm-control- judicial initiation

- suspension of the procedure

- annulment or prohibition of implementation

3.2. Constitutional complaint

- conditions- Doctrine of „living law” (DECISION 57/1991

AB) vs. constitutional requirement (DECISION 38/1993 AB)

- Szivárvány case (DECISION 21/1996 AB)- complaint as appeal (DECISION 23/1998 AB)- Act XLV of 1999 – new trial, decision of superior

administrative authority

3.3. Constitutional ommission– actio popularis– conditions: ommission of legislative duty +

violation of Constitution – lack of sanction; annulment of inadequate

regulation

3.4. Abstract constitutional interpretation

- initiators - no „advisory opinion” (DECISION 31/1990

AB, DECISION 52/1997 AB)

4. Epilog: activism of competence and „authority-

formation”

– Whether is moral interpretation possible in questions of procedure? (Tóth Gábor Attila)

– „authority-formation” of the Constitutional Court: „living law”, „constitutional requirement”, „temporary measures” (Sólyom László) + international treaties, referendum

Thank you for your attention!