Judicial self-restraint in the judicature of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic Abstract The thesis deals with the role of the judicial self-restraint in the judicature of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic. Besides the theoretical definitions is the pivotal part of the thesis practical section that is focused on the analysis of pre-selected decisions of the Constitutional Court with respect to the judicial self-restraint. The first chapter contains definition of the theory of separation of powers as basis for the judicial self-restraint and its subcategories. Part of this chapter is oriented at the judicial power itself, which is crucial for the thesis. The second chapter provides definitions of key concepts - principal of judicial self-restraint, priority of the constitutionally conformal interpretation, political question doctrine and judicial activism, as it is called. These concepts are defined from the points of view of the angloamerican legal system as well as czech legal system. In the second chapter are also stated possible factors that may lead to the judicial activism and to the judiciary state, as it is called. The chapter afterwards describes the judicial interpretation and application of law in the context of the judicial self-restraint and provides relevant historical...

The purpose of the thesis is the accessibility of electronic sources of judicature in the Czech Republic. The thesis deals with publicly as well as commercially accessible sources. The publicly accessible sources are represented by NALUS which is administered by the Constitutional court, the retrieval system of The Supreme Court of the Czech Republic and the retrieval system of The Supreme Administrative Court. The commercially accessible sources are represented by the Beck online, ASPI and CODEXIS.All the sources taken into account are evaluated by the range of their content, the quality of search engine and user interface.

[pt] A proteção do membro do Poder Legislativo no tocante às suas opiniões, palavras e votos, por meio da inviolabilidade parlamentar, apresenta relevantes raízes históricas, presença em inúmeros ordenamentos jurídicos e finalidades essenciais para o Estado Democrático de Direito, sobretudo, com atenção ao postulado da separação de poderes e à teoria da representação popular. Essa essencialidade ao sistema jurídico suscita debates a respeito dos seus contornos, sejam aqueles tracejados pelas normas constitucionais, sejam aqueles delineados pelas Cortes. Diante disso, pretende-se analisar como a jurisprudência de dois importantes tribunais, com competências em matéria constitucional, vêm se posicionando e definindo ou não parâmetros e limites à inviolabilidade parlamentar. São eles: o Supremo Tribunal Federal e a Corte Constitucional Colombiana. De ambas as Cortes, parte-se de um exame desde a promulgação da Constituição brasileira de 1988 e da Constituição colombiana de 1991 até os últimos julgamentos realizados em 2022. / [en] The protection of members of the Legislative Power to their opinions, words and votes, through parliamentary inviolability, has relevant historical roots, presence in numerous legal systems and essential purposes for the Democratic State of Law, above all, with attention to the postulate of the separation of powers and the theory of popular representation. This essentiality to the legal system raises debates about its contours, whether those traced by constitutional norms, or those outlined by the Courts. Therefore, it is intended to analyze how the jurisprudence of two important courts, with competences in constitutional matters, have been positioning themselves and defining or not parameters and limits to parliamentary inviolability. They are: the Brazilian Supreme Court and the Colombian Constitutional Court. From both Courts, it starts from an examination since the promulgation of the Brazilian Constitution of 1988 and the Colombian Constitution of 1991 until the last judgments carried out in 2022.

Dans un contexte politique, économique et culturel différent, la justice constitutionnelle se développe en Égypte et en France. D’un point de vue purement juridique, le contrôle de constitutionnalité des lois s’exerce dans les deux pays selon une procédure différente. Le développement du contrôle de constitutionnalité des lois dans les deux pays avait, toutefois, pour effet de reproduire progressivement des rapprochements quant au contrôle de constitutionnalité des lois. L’Égypte établit en 2005 un mécanisme a priori sur la constitutionnalité des certaines catégories des lois électorales. De son côté, la France finit en 2008 par inaugurer un mécanisme du contrôle a posteriori (la QPC). Cette thèse propose de montrer que la justice constitutionnelle dans les deux pays s’appuie sur les mêmes fondements, tant sur un plan matériel que formel. Le contrôle exercé par la Cour constitutionnelle dans chacun des deux pays peut être considéré comme une application du modèle européen de justice constitutionnelle adaptée aux différentes données politiques, juridiques, économiques et culturelles de chacun de deux pays. / In the political, economic, and cultural status quo, constitutional justice has been developed in both Egypt and France. From the legal perspective, it has been realized that various difference between both countries within the mechanism of the constitutional review of laws. Recently, the development of this legal issue in both countries leads to some of similarities between the mechanism in both Egypt and France, especially on the procedural level. Egypt adopted the same French scheme in 2005 with respect to some of the election laws. Further, France adopted the same constitutional review as Egypt via subordinate claim in 2008. But that does not mean that the constitutional review in both countries include only the procedural levels but also the main principle of the legal constitutional reviews in Egypt and France

This master thesis aims the analysis of the constitutional Institute of dissolution of the Bundestag in the Basic law of Germany and the Chamber of Deputies in the Constitution of the Czech Republic and its usage in the constitutional and political praxis. It is a two-case-study with the goal to compare how the dissolution of parliament is defined in both constitutions, which restrictions are set for its usage, who is the decision maker and for which situations the dissolution of parliament is defined in those constitutions. At the very beginning, the basic theory of the dissolution and its types are presented followed by the two case studies that include the historical background of the actual valid constitutional modification the dissolution of parliament. The second part of each case study consists of the analysis of the actual modification and presentation of its specifics and relation to other articles of the constitution. The third part of both case studies covers the actual political and constitutional usage of the Institute of dissolution, its attempts and also the decisions of the constitutional courts in each country. The Czech case also covers the constitutional amendment that extended the possibility to dissolve the Czech Chamber of Deputies. In the German case also the so-called...

台灣司法院大法官早在1948年就開始進行違憲審查，迄今已釋憲超過65餘載，共作成730餘則大法官解釋，違憲宣告的比例大約30%至40%之間，其中與社會權相關的案件約20餘件，面對社會權應如何司法性的提問，我國學者多認為大法官對於社會權案件之釋憲立場過於難以捉摸，時而寬鬆時而嚴謹，大法官於社會權案件之審查上，並未創造出一套如同自由權般穩定且具有預測可能性的審查標準。 對於我國大法官於社會權案件中的釋憲難題，若僅著墨於方法論上的研究，忽略國家整體社會發展的歷史脈絡，將有見樹不見林之遺憾，而此種將社會發展歷史脈絡融入大法官釋憲過程中，最受國際推崇者莫過於南非憲法法院。南非在歷經長達數百年的種族隔離後，終於揮別威權擁抱民主，並擁有一部為世人所稱羨的新憲法，然而新民主南非所面臨來自於經濟、社會、政治與轉型正義等各方面之挑戰，並未因新憲法的制定而全盤迎刃而解。相反的，民主化後的新政府因財政短缺，導致無法實踐南非憲法中所保障之社會權，求助無門的民眾最終只能向憲法法院訴請權利保障。南非憲法法院面對困擾全球各地憲法法院之亙古難題「社會權如何司法性」時，並不懼怕挑戰，展現出以人為本之人權保障與弱勢保障之高度，做出許多為世人所稱羨之社會權憲法判決。 反思我國之社會權釋憲案件，多數均非由經濟弱勢者所提出，甚或有些與弱勢生存保障密切相關之釋憲案，最終這些弱勢群體之弱勢成因、社會處境現狀並未在釋憲場域中被凸顯、被衡量，導致憲法權利保障所連結之個人或群體從事現場域中消失了。對此，人民權利保障與權力分立原則同為憲法之兩大基石，二者間並無孰輕孰重之差別，故在社會權案件中，雖需考量資源有限性等權力分立之問題，然而過度尊重立法者之形成自由忽略人民權利保障之作法，仍有進一步改善之空間。

The interim Constitution and the 1996 South African Constitution are products of a compromise between various political parties, mainly those that advocated for a unitary system, for example the African National Congress (ANC) and the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) were the leading proponents , anti the parties that advocated for a federal constitution, the significant ones being the Inkatha Freedom Party (lFP), the National Party (NP) and the Democratic Party (DP). The interim Constitution and the 1996 South African Constitution contain both unitary and substantial federal characteristics. The study deals with the origins of the federal idea and how the concept federalism is understood and applied internationally, and draws out some key characteristics that are common in federal constitutions so as to measure the interim Constitution and the 1996 South African Constitution against such common characteristics. The conclusion deals with recommendations of how the substantial federal characteristics could be effectively managed through intergovernmental relations / Political Science / M.A. (African Politics)

Although s 9 of the new Constitution 1 guarantees the right to life, there is no express provision which abolishes the death sentence. Whereas in the past the death sentence could only be avoided by the exercise of judicial discretion or political and public pressure, its imposition will now have to be entirely re-evaluated. Not only are all the laws of the country subject to the new Constitution, 2 but so too a Constitutional Court will be operational which will have the power to test the constitutionality of any such laws. By looking at the standards and relevant issues which are considered to define the constitutionality of the death sentence internationally, reviewing current application of the death sentence in South Africa, drawing comparisons, and by studying the problems unique to the South African situation, it will be the aim of this dissertation to determine how the death sentence will fare under a Constitutional Court. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL. M.

The Zuma case - important as the first decision of the Constitutional Court - is primarily concerned with the constitutionality of section 217(l)(b)(ii) of the Criminal Procedure Act. In trying to fmd an answer to this question, the Constitutional Court also addressed other important issues. In this dissertation the Constitutional Court's decision on the constitutionality of section 217(1)(b)(ii) is examined, as well as important general principles laid down by the Court regarding incompetent referrals by the Supreme Court; constitutional interpretation; reverse onus provisions and the right to a fair trial; as well as the application of the general limitation clause. A closer look is taken at adherence to these principles in subsequent Constitutional Court decisions, and finally a conclusion is reached on the value of the Zuma case. / Law / LL.M. (Law)

The dissertation consists of an analysis of the Constitutional Court decision S v Mhlungu 1995(7) BCLR 793 CC. The analysis focuses on the significance of the different interpretative approaches adopted by the members of the Court in analysing section 241(8) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Afii.ca Act 200 of 1993. The theoretical approaches to constitutional interpretation are first briefly discussed. This is followed by a description of the four respective judgments in the decision. The case is then analysed in respect of section 3 5, Chapter 3 and the Constitution itself in order to determine the significance. The jurisprudence of the Court (developed in its first eight decisions) is evaluated to assess the approach of the Constitutional Court to Chapter 3 and the remainder of the Constitution respectively. The conclusion is reached that the Court has endorsed a generous/purposive approach to constitutional interpretation and that this extends to the entire text of the Constitution. / Law / LL.M.