Constitutional Court and Constitutional Review in Albania

ICL Journal ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brunilda Bara ◽  
Jonad Bara
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Historical Changes ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
Legal Writers

AbstractThis article tends to give an insight on the historical and institutional develop­ment of the Constitutional Court of Albania, on the need of the society and the historical changes that led to its creation.It focuses especially on the role and competences of this Court on the protection of the rule of law, of the constitutional principles, on the balancing and division of powers, on the protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals. Its aim is to provide overall information on the functioning and standards it follows.It is based on the jurisprudence of this Court during the years and is enriched by its deci­sions on particular subjects and compares this Court to other similar ones in Eastern Euro­pean countries.The article is mainly directed to scholars and legal writers whose aim is to compare the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court of Albania to other similar courts.

scholarly journals Peran Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Mewujudkan Negara Hukum Yang Demokratis

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (25) ◽  
pp. 28 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Erli Salia
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
The State ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
State Agency ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Constitutional Rights ◽  
Democratic Government ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Guardian

The Constitutional Court is the state agency that was born after the reform in 1999. Through the changes to the Constitution of 1945, the Constitutional Court is authorized to examine  laws (acts) against the Constitution. In addition there are other powers to protect the fundamental rights relating to the constitutional rights of citizens. As a state agency has the authority of the Constitutional Court, among others, as the supreme interpreter of the constitution in addition to realizing the democratic government, the Constitutional Court to act as the guardian of democracy, protection of constitutional rights of citizens and the protection of human rights.Key words: the rule of law, democracy, constitutional court

Schröder’s Dissolution of the Bundestag Approved

2006 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulrike Heckötter ◽  
Christoph Spielmann
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Political Crisis ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
German Government ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Judicial Control ◽  
Division Of Powers ◽  
German Constitutional Court ◽  
The Stability

Dissolution of the Bundestag by the Federal President on advice of Federal Chancellor — A ‘negative’ motion for a vote of confidence — Precedents of 1972 and 1982 — Dissolution in conformity with the constitution according to German constitutional court — The existence of a political crisis sine qua non for a dissolution to be constitutionally legitimate — Limited judicial control on decision to dissolve as set out in a 1983 ruling even further limited in the 2005 ruling — Effects of the exercised judicial self-restraint on constitutional division of powers — No proof for a decline of the rule of law or of acceptance of directly democratic elements — Strengthening of the powers of the Federal Chancellor sign of faith in the stability of the German government system.

scholarly journals The german separation between police and the offices for the protection of the Constitution. Legal framework

2016 ◽  
pp. 36-43
Author(s):  
CODRIN TIMU ◽  
MARTIN IBLER
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Terrorist Attacks ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Separation Principle ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Federal Constitutional

“The rule of law and the federal state, as well as the protection of the fundamental rights could forbid the fusion of certain offices or the delegation of these offices with functions that are incompatible with their constitutional position“1. In this manner the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany mentions the separation between police and the offices for the protection of the constitution. After the terrorist attacks in the USA, Spain, France, Belgium and Germany, the teamwork between the state offices has kept on intensifying. The discussion (debate) about the legal framework of the separation principle continued however to exist. In a time, where the security of the citizens steals away the space of the fundamental rights, to treat this subject is of the utmost importance2, in order not to allow the recurrence of the mistakes of the Weimar Republic. The article deals with the legal framework of the German separation between police and the offices for the protection of the constitution and gives an answer to the question if this principle has a constitutional status.

Constitutional courts as European Union courts

2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 792-821 ◽  
Author(s):  
Davide Paris
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Domestic Legislation

In principle, constitutional courts do not review questions of domestic compliance with EU law, as these are considered to be outside their jurisdiction. But there are several exceptions in which EU law serves as a yardstick for constitutional review. This article focuses on these exceptions from a comparative perspective. First, it describes the ‘state of the art’ by examining whether and to what extent constitutional courts already use EU law as a standard for their decisions and invalidate domestic legislation or courts’ decisions that conflict with EU law. Then, it explores the limits within which EU law can be invoked as a yardstick for constitutional review without jeopardizing the principle of primacy of EU law. Finally, it argues that constitutional courts should not be afraid to embrace EU law as a standard for review: Doing so would not only contribute to a better protection of fundamental rights and the rule of law in Europe, but would also further the interests of constitutional courts.

scholarly journals Protection of Prisoner’s Human Rights in Prisons through the Guidelines of Rule of Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 71
Author(s):  
Ebad Rouhi ◽  
Leila Raisi Dezaki ◽  
Mahmoud Jalali Karveh
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Educational Management ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Prison Management ◽  
Fundamental Rights And Freedoms ◽  
The Right

Punishing the criminals is one of the criminal justice mechanisms to compensation and reparation for victims and society. In this regards some of the punishments are determined by criminal justice systems in every society. Imprisonment is one of these penalties which specified in this regard and through this punishment the convicted persons are detained in prison. However, the guilty is sentenced to prison and restriction of his or her liberties, but she or he has fundamental rights and freedoms that must be protected even if in prison and has the right to how to be punished. All of these rights and freedoms are protected by the rule of law. This issue means that how to be punished is restricted under the definite principles which have to be exercised when the retribution and punishment is ongoing. This matter of criminal law and criminal justice is considered as right on how to be punished. The area of this right and authority of prison’s heads and its personnel is determined by law. In order to do that and protection of prisoner’s human rights and regulating manner with them and also for prison management, the rule of law provided a set of guidelines. According to these guidelines prison is managed in the legal framework as well as in this context the prisoner’s rights are protected effectively. These guidelines are provided in some of international legal instruments. This article investigates these guidelines and in respect of their human rights aspects which related to the environmental, educational, management, health care, personnel and humanistic dimensions of imprisonment these guidelines and instructions are studied and analyzed.

scholarly journals Constitutional Review in the Middle East and North Africa

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Middle East ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
North Africa ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
Constitutional Review ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Current State ◽  
Pioneer Effort ◽  
The Arab Spring ◽  
Electoral Law

Ten years after the Arab Spring, many parts of the Middle East and North Africa are struggling with the consequences of armed conflict, a balance of power tilted in favour of the executive and challenges to the rule of law. However, institutions charged with conducting constitutional review have been reformed substantially in most of the countries in those regions. A pioneer effort, this book offers first-hand insights by renowned practitioners and scholars into constitutional review in the Middle East and North Africa, discerning commonalities and differences from a comparative perspective. Structured along selected topics of interdisciplinary relevance—judicial independence, protection of fundamental rights, control of electoral law, and religious law in the constitutional order—the publication highlights the current state of constitutional review in the region: reference models, major develop-ments, challenges and trends. Anja Schoeller-Schletter is a lawyer and historian focusing on comparative constitutional law in North Africa and the Middle East. She designed the project behind this publication in her capacity as the Head of the Rule of Law Programme Middle East/North Africa in Beirut, Lebanon, a programme funded by the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung.

DEKADENSI PEMILIHAN HAKIM AGUNG OLEH DPR RI

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-104
Author(s):  
Rustam Magun Pikahulan
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Good Governance ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Due Diligence ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Institutional Status ◽  
The Government

Abstract: The Plato's conception of the rule of law states that good governance is based on good law. The organization also spreads to the world of Supreme Court justices, the election caused a decadence to the institutional status of the House of Representatives as a people's representative in the government whose implementation was not in line with the decision of the Constitutional Court. Based on the decision of the Constitutional Court No.27/PUU-XI/2013 explains that the House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only approve or disapprove candidates for Supreme Court Justices that have been submitted by the Judicial Commission. In addition, the proportion of proposed Supreme Court Justices from the judicial commission to the House of Representatives (DPR) has changed, whereas previously the Judicial Commission had to propose 3 (three) of each vacancy for the Justices, now it is only one of each vacant for Supreme Court Judges. by the Supreme Court. The House of Representatives no longer has the authority to conduct due diligence and suitability (elect) to prospective Supreme Judges proposed by the Judicial Commission. The House of Representatives can only "approve" or "disagree" the Supreme Judge candidates nominated by the Judicial Commission.

scholarly journals A Populist Monster and the future of Constitutional Democracy

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-100
Author(s):  
Andraž Teršek
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Constitutional Democracy ◽  
Council Of Europe ◽  
Constitutional Courts ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Eu

Abstract The central objective of the post-socialist European countries which are also Member States of the EU and Council of Europe, as proclaimed and enshrined in their constitutions before their official independence, is the establishment of a democracy based on the rule of law and effective legal protection of fundamental human rights and freedoms. In this article the author explains what, in his opinion, is the main problem and why these goals are still not sufficiently achieved: the ruthless simplification of the understanding of the social function and functioning of constitutional courts, which is narrow, rigid and holistically focused primarily or exclusively on the question of whether the judges of these courts are “left or right” in purely daily-political sense, and consequently, whether constitutional court decisions are taken (described, understood) as either “left or right” in purely and shallow daily-party-political sense/manner. With nothing else between and no other foundation. The author describes such rhetoric, this kind of superficial labeling/marking, such an approach towards constitutional law-making as a matter of unbearable and unthinking simplicity, and introduces the term A Populist Monster. The reasons that have led to the problem of this kind of populism and its devastating effects on the quality and development of constitutional democracy and the rule of law are analyzed clearly and critically.

scholarly journals Rights and Powers in the European Union: Towards a Charter that is Fully Applicable to the Member States?

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Aida TORRES PÉREZ
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Fundamental Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Member States ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Rights Protection ◽  
Scope Of Application ◽  
Judicial Protection ◽  
Eu Fundamental Rights ◽  
The Eu

Abstract This contribution will tackle a central question for the architecture of fundamental rights protection in the EU: can we envision a Charter that fully applies to the Member States, even beyond the limits of its scope of application? To improve our understanding of the boundaries of the Charter and the potential for further expansion, I will examine the legal avenues through which the CJEU has extended the scope of application of EU fundamental rights in fields of state powers. While the latent pull of citizenship towards a more expansive application of the Charter has not been fully realized, the principle of effective judicial protection (Article 19(1) TEU) has recently shown potential for protection under EU law beyond the boundaries of the Charter. As will be argued, effective judicial protection may well become a doorway for full application of the Charter to the Member States. While such an outcome might currently seem politically unsound, I contend that a progressive case-by-case expansion of the applicability of the Charter to the Member States would be welcome from the standpoint of a robust notion of the rule of law in the EU.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document