Rozvadovskyi V., Knysh V. Genesis of the powers of constitutional justice bodies: foreign and domestic experience

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33098/2078-6670.2025.19.31.188-195

The purpose of the scientific article is to study the foreign and domestic experience of the genesis of the powers of the bodies of constitutional justice.

The methods used in the study of this topic are: system-structural, which was used to study the structure of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and foreign bodies of constitutional justice; system-functional, which was applied to the study of the functions of domestic and foreign bodies of constitutional justice; comparative law method, which made it possible to carry out a comparative analysis of the features of the functioning of the bodies of constitutional justice in different legal systems.

The result of the article was a systematic coverage of the periods of formation and further development of constitutional justice both in terms of a holistic institutional understanding and in terms of the initial formation and transformation of powers. At the same time, the activities of the bodies of constitutional justice historically began with the right to determine the constitutionality of a legislative act. Gradually, the scope of powers increased and, today, each state, when regulating the functioning of the bodies of constitutional justice, proceeds from individual priorities.

Conclusions. The study established that the specifics of the powers of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and taking into account foreign experience, the following conclusions can be drawn: 1) the list of powers of the bodies of constitutional justice can be of the following types: a) universal (all types of regulatory acts fall under the jurisdiction – laws, acts of the president, executive authorities, local self-government bodies); b) limited (laws, legal acts of the president and government, international treaties); c) exhaustive; d) open; 2) one of the main powers of the bodies of constitutional justice is to assess the compliance (legitimacy) of a regulatory act with the Constitution. In general, there are two systems for ensuring such legitimacy: a) compliance only with the constitution of the state itself; b) compliance not only with the constitution, but also with other legal acts that have greater legal force in relation to the act being checked; 3) analysis of articles of constitutions and laws on bodies of constitutional justice in Europe makes it possible to establish three approaches to ensuring the compliance of an international treaty with constitutional provisions: a) prior control; 2) prior and subsequent control; 3) exclusively subsequent control; 4) among the European countries in whose legal systems a body of constitutional justice operates and for which the right of official and binding interpretation of the constitution and laws is legally enshrined, it is possible to determine: a) at the level of constitutions; b) at the level of the constitution and constitutional laws; 3) at the level of constitutional laws: 5) The Constitutional Court of Ukraine, as a special instance in constitutional proceedings, differs from the bodies of the judicial branch of power in the following features: a) organization and functioning are determined by the provisions of the country’s fundamental law, which makes it difficult to change their legal status; b) the scope of powers (the exclusive right to finally decide on the issue of constitutional review of the legality of the actions of other state bodies); c) a special method of forming the composition of these bodies and in the special legal status of judges; d) a significant degree of internal organizational independence, which is expressed in their right in most countries to determine their chairman, independently adopt regulations, etc.; e) a special procedure for activity; e) a mechanism for implementing decisions; f) legal consequences of decisions made (have a final and binding nature); 6) functional aspects of the activities of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, on the one hand, are characterized by its separation from the general judicial system of Ukraine, and on the other hand, they give it the opportunity to act as an arbitrator in relations between public authorities (through the mechanisms for considering constitutional submissions and constitutional appeals), as well as in relations between public authorities and civil society or its members (through the mechanism for considering constitutional complaints).

Key words: justice, constitutional justice, constitutional justice of Ukraine, constitutional court, powers, powers of the constitutional court, powers of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, constitutional control, constitutional control in Ukraine.

References

1. The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey as amended (1982) / Published in the Supplement to the State Gazette, No. 17863 of November 09, 1982. BYEGM Matbaas-Ankara. 116 p. (in Ukrainian)

2. Tykhy, V. L. (1998). Ofitsiine tlumachennia Konstytutsii ta zakoniv Ukrainy Konstytutsiinym Sudom Ukrainy [Official interpretation of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine]. Visnyk Konstytutsiinoho Sudu Ukrainy, 4, 38-45. (in Ukrainian)

3. Rozvadovsky, V. I. (2015). Protsesualnyi status konstytutsiinoho sudu Ukrainy yak holovnoho ta oboviazkovoho subiekta konstytutsiinoho provadzhennia. [Procedural status of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine as the main and mandatory subject of constitutional proceedings]. Aktualni problemy vdoskonalennia chynnoho zakonodavstva Ukrainy. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats, 38, 14-29. (in Ukrainian)

4. Savchyn, M. (1999). Konstytutsiinyi Sud Ukrainy u mekhanizmi harantuvannia prav i svobod liudyny [The Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the mechanism of guaranteeing human rights and freedoms]. Pravo Ukrainy, 4, 35-38. (in Ukrainian)

5. Mors, D. L. (1998). Tlumachennia konstytutsii. Tlumachennia Konstytutsii ta zakonodavchykh aktiv. Pryntsypy konstytutsiinoho kontroliu [Interpretation of the Constitution. Interpretation of the Constitution and Legislative Acts]. Seminar orhanizovanyi Konstytutsiinym Sudom Ukrainy, ARD/ChEKKI Konsortsiumom “Verkhovenstvo prava» (AMRSSh), Yevropeiskoiu Komisiieiu “Za demokratiiu cherez pravo». (pp. 51-52). Kyiv: AMRSS. (in Ukrainian)

6. Golovchenko, V. V., Kovalsky V. S. (1998). Yurydychna terminolohiia: Dovidnyk [Legal Terminology: Handbook]. Kyiv: Yurinkom Inter. (in Ukrainian)

7. Shapoval, V. (2006). Konstytutsiine pravo zarubizhnykh krain [Constitutional Law of Foreign Countries]. Kyiv. (in Ukrainian)