This article provides a study of the modalities and legal effects of the termination of the functions of members of the Congolese Constitutional Court. It offers a detailed analysis based mainly on the relevant provisions of Ordinance No. 16/070 of August 22, 2016 on the special status of members of the Constitutional Court. This Ordinance was adopted in application of the Congolese Constitution of February 18, 2006 in conjunction with organic-law No. 13/026 of October 15, 2013 on the organization and functioning of the Constitutional Court. Distinguishing on the one hand the normal cause of cessation of functions - the expiry of the mandate - and on the other hand the so-called exceptional causes - the resignation, dismissal and death of a member -, the study shows that the enumeration thus retained from the ordinance is incomplete with regard to the above-mentioned organic law. Thus, the list must be supplemented with the "nullity of the appointment" of a member in accordance with articles 2 and 3 of that organic law. The law is silent, however, on the issue of the voluntary retirement of members, although the implementation of this right inevitably has an impact on the end of their functions. The study therefore continues by an examination of both the general and the specific legal effects of these different modalities of ending the functions of a member of the Constitutional Court. Finally, in order to support and complete this essentially theoretical analysis, the article also looks at the question that remains most topical in Congolese constitutional law, namely the legal nature of the 'power' of the President of the Republic to appoint members of the Constitutional Court to other Courts or functions during their term of office. It concludes that such a power is not justified in the current framework of Congolese constitutional law. Indeed, it is inconceivable that such appointments should be imposed on the Constitutional Court members, their acceptance being the only exception to the principle of irremovability that governs them. Such a case should be considered one of voluntary resignation and a subsitute member should therefore only be appointed after this situation has been ascertained and established by the Constitutional Court.