Suchergebnisse

Topics such as military tribunals, same-sex marriage, informative privacy, reproductive rights, affirmative action, and states' rights fill the landscape of contemporary legal debate and media discussion, and they all fall under the umbrella of the Due Process Clauses of the United States Constitution. However, what is not always fully understood is the constitutional basis of these rights, or the exact list of due process rights as they have evolved over time through judicial interpretation. In The Arc of Due Process in American Constitutional Law, Sullivan and Massaro describe the intricate.

"The concept of a European Constitutional Area has been used in legal scholarship to describe a common space of constitutionalism where national and international constitutional guarantees interact to maintain the common constitutional values of Europe. This concept has not yet been tested in a case where the constitutional order of a Member State of the EU seems to develop serious deficiencies. The present volume aims to assess recent constitutional developments in Hungary and Romania as well as the interplay of national, international and European constitutionalism that react to the loopholes in national constitutions. Accordingly, a core part of the volume is an in-depth analysis of the situation in Hungary and Romania. Based on that, the volume offers an account of the different reaction mechanisms of the European Union and of the Council of Europe. Beyond an actual stock-taking of these mechanisms, their legal and political frameworks are explored, as well as different ways to extend their reach. In this way the volume contributes to a little studied aspect of European Constitutionalism."--Bloomsbury Publishing

Defence date: 18 September 2015 ; Examining Board: Professor Marise Cremona, European University Institute (Supervisor); Professor Dennis Patterson, European University Institute; Professor Elspeth Guild, Radbound University Nijmegen; Professor Anne Peters, Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law and International Law. ; Constitutions establish communities. This essay explores how a European political community can be advanced through EU constitutional law. It is shown that legitimacy of the Union derives from three conceptions of Peace manifest in EU free movement law, external agreements of the Union and migration law under the AFSJ. The constitutional role of the Union is to ensure Peace by addressing two types of conflict. The first are static conflicts of interests between the national polities in the EU. These are avoided by ensuring reciprocal non-interference between Member States in the Union through deregulation in Union law. The second are dynamic conflicts of ideas about positive liberty held by the peoples of Europe that can be resolved through regulation in a European political space. Here, Union law enables a continuous process of re-negotiating a shared European idea of positive liberty that can be accepted as own by each national polity in the EU. Both solutions are premised on liberty from domination of each national polity, from which legitimacy of the Union and the European political space ensue. Substantive law and constitutional theory, analysis of the legislative process and CJEU case law, insights from psychology and philosophy are combined throughout this work to unveil how a stronger Union can be advanced through constitutional law.

The UN Charter and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties require interpreting treaties and settling international disputes "in conformity with the principles of justice and international law." This contribution discusses procedural and substantive principles of justice which the international judge may take into account in interpreting international economic agreements. The "sovereign equality of states" underlying the "international law of coexistence" as well as the "international law of intergovernmental cooperation" must be interpreted in conformity with the universal recognition of human dignity as a source of inalienable human rights. The universal recognition of economic and social human rights further requires taking into account solidarity principles, as proposed also by the sociological approach to international law. The constitutional structures and citizen-oriented functions of the law of international economic organizations liberalizing and regulating mutually beneficial market transactions among citizens require judges to engage in a careful balancing of state-centered and citizen-oriented principles of international law, including respect for the emerging human right to democratic decision-making. This modern "international integration law" and the increasing number of "international constitutional rules" promote the reconciliation of the various state-centered approaches, human rights approaches, sociological approaches and policy-approaches to international law as a system not only of international rules and "legal pluralism" but also of constitutionally limited decision-making processes and struggles for human rights.

Abstract
While the European Union is in the process of carefully navigating among the various forms of sub-federalism, Member States - including recent ones like Hungary, trying to find an equilibrium between their sovereignty and European supranationalism - have to cope with possible conflicts between their national legal systems and EU law. Since Hungary's accession to the European Union, the Hungarian Constitutional Court has faced questions regarding the constitutionality of EU legal rules and conflicts between European and national legal norms. This article examines these issues and analyzes criteria of constitutional review that the Court has gradually set out in dealing with some of these conflicts. So far, it has established two principles marking the boundaries of future constitutional practice. First, it will treat the founding and amending treaties of the European Union as part of domestic law for the purposes of constitutional review, thereby setting up a two-tier system of legal rules applicable within Hungarian legal practice instead of a possible three-tier construction that would distinguish between national, international and European law. Second, in the absence of jurisdiction to review substantive (un)constitutionality (as opposed to procedural constitutionality), the Constitutional Court does not regard a conflict between domestic law and EU law as a constitutionality issue and this mandates the ordinary courts to resolve such conflict of a sub-constitutional nature. Taking these conclusions as starting points, this article sets out the possible types of conflicts that may occur between EU rules and other legal rules applicable in Hungary, weighing the constitutional relevance of these conflicts; it also outlines the directions along which the practice of the Hungarian Constitutional Court may develop in this respect.

AbstractThe Constitutional Court is a state institution that has the authority for reviewing laws against the Constitution (Judicial Review). Several times in issuing its decisions, the Constitutional Court has acted as a Positive Legislator. The potential for a legal vacuum as the implication of revoking a law is large. and also the slow formation of laws by the legislative body (DPR) and the lack of quality of regulations. The current law-making does not pay attention to legal ideals based on Pancasila so that the resulting legal products lose their meaning. This has resulted in many people whose constitutional rights have been violated. The state should be present to give full constitutional rights to its citizens. The Constitutional Court needs additional authority to maintain the supremacy of the constitution. additional authority as a preventive mechanism is Judicial Preview. The French state places Judicial Preview as an authority of the Constitutional Council. Austria and Germany apply Judicial Preview as a preventive measure for losses that can occur if the Draft Law is passed. A renewal of the Constitutional Law to perfect existing ones makes the prospect of Judicial Preview in Indonesia an Urgency for immediate implementation.Keywords: Constitutional Court, Authority, Judicial Preview AbstrakMahkamah Konstitusi merupakan lembaga negara yang memiliki kewenangan pengujian Undang-Undang terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar (Judicial Review). Dalam mengeluarkan putusannya Mahkamah Konstitusi beberapa kali bertindak sebagai Positif Legislator. Potensi terjadinya kekosongan hukum sebagai implikasi dicabutnya suatu Undang-Undang sangatlah besar. Ditambah dengan lambatnya pembentukan Undang-Undang oleh lembaga legislatif (DPR) serta kualitas peraturan yang kurang. Pembuatan Undang-Undang saat ini tidak memperhatikan cita hukum yang berakar pada Pancasila sehingga produk hukum yang dihasilkan kehilangan maknanya. Hal ini mengakibatkan banyak masyarakat yang dilanggar hak konstitusionalnya. Negara seharusnya hadir untuk memberikan hak konstitusional secara penuh kepada warga negaranya. Untuk mencegah hal tersebut maka Mahkamah Konstitusi membutuhkan suatu kewenangan tambahan untuk menjaga tegaknya supremasi konstitusi. Kewenangan tambahan sebagai mekanisme preventif tersebut berupa Pengujian Rancangan Undang-Undang (Judicial Preview). Perancis menempatkan Judicial Preview sebagai kewenangan dari Constitutional Council. Austria dan Jerman juga memberlakukannya sebagai tindakan pencegahan. Pembangunan Hukum Konstitusi untuk menyempurnakan yang sudah ada menjadikan prospek Pengujian Rancangan Undang-Undang di Indonesia menjadi urgensi untuk segera diterapkan.Kata Kunci: Mahkamah Konstitusi, Kewenangan, Judicial Preview АннотацияКонституционный суд - это государственное учреждение, которое имеет право проверять законы на предмет соответствия Конституции. Вынося свои решения, Конституционный суд несколько раз выступал в качестве позитивного законодателя. Потенциал правового вакуума как последствия отмены закона огромен, особенно в сочетании с медленным формированием законов законодательным органом (DPR) и отсутствием качественных нормативных актов. Текущее формирование законодательства не обращает внимания на идеалы права, укоренившиеся в Pancasila, так что получаемые легальные продукты теряют свое значение. Это привело к тому, что конституционные права многих людей были нарушены. Государство должно присутствовать, чтобы предоставить своим гражданам полные конституционные права. Чтобы этого не произошло, Конституционному суду необходимы дополнительные полномочия для защиты верховенства конституции. Дополнительные полномочия в качестве превентивного механизма представлены в форме судебного предварительного надзора (Judicial Preview). Франция помещает судебный предварительный надзор в ведение Конституционного Совета. Австрия и Германия также приняли его в качестве меры предосторожности. Разработка Конституционного закона с целью усовершенствования существующего делает перспективу судебного надзора в Индонезии неотложной его реализацией.Ключевые Слова: Конституционный Суд, Власть, Судебный Надзор