Suchergebnisse

This research addresses the issue of the mutual influence between the administrative judge and the constitutional judge using a comparative analytical approach. In the beginning, the researcher discusses the role of the administrative judge in protecting the rights and freedoms of individuals by presenting the basic elements that prove the effective implementation of this control, such as proportionality and disciplinary decisions. The research also discusses the primary constitutional issue in France, or what some call the review of raising the issue of the unconstitutionality, to demonstrate the strengthening of the role of the judge and his involvement in reviewing the constitutionality of laws. Then the research discusses the role of the constitutional judge in protecting the rights and freedoms based on the achievements of the French constitutional judge, starting with his decision on freedom of association (1971), in which he enshrined the constitutional value of the preamble of the 1958 constitution. What gives the decisions of the Constitutional Council the utmost significance is their compulsory as they are imposed on the judiciary and administration automatically (the power of the case). Then the research addresses and analyzes the positive mutual impact between the constitutional judge and the administrative judge, so it first presents the confirmed influence of the administrative judge, as he turns into a miniature constitutional council through his role in reviewing the unconstitutionality. The researcher also presents the position of the jurist Bernard Stern, who believes that the administrative judge is the one who does not want to violate the authority of the Constitutional Council while he can enforce strong and violent control over the work of the Constitutional Council. Even though the issue of mutual influence between the administrative judge and the constitutional judge is fluctuating, the harmony and cooperation between them remain the master of the situation.