- Published: October 24, 2018
Abstract judicial reviews – Regional Constitutional Court Conference in Serbia
From 8 to 10 October 2018, a regional conference on “Decisions of constitutional courts in abstract judicial reviews as a contribution towards supporting the rule of law” was organised jointly by the Constitutional Court of Serbia and the IRZ in Belgrade. Judges from the following constitutional courts took part in the conference:
- Bosnia and Herzegovina,
- Montenegro and
- Both entity constitutional courts of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republika Srpska.
In preparation for the subsequent intense discussions, the following representatives of the participating constitutional courts presented the relevant case law in their countries:
- Milan Stanić, a judge at the Constitutional Court of Serbia,
- Mato Tadić, Vice-President of the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
- Dragoljub Drašković, President of the Constitutional Court of Montenegro,
- Dr. Sc. Mato Arlović, a judge at the Constitutional Court of Croatia,
- Nikola Ivanovski, President of the Constitutional Court of Macedonia,
- Irena Mojović, Vice-President of the Constitutional Court of Republika Srpska, and
- Aleksandra Martinović, President of the Constitutional Court of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Afterwards, Prof. Dr. Udo Steiner, a former judge at the German Constitutional Court, presented the case law of the German Constitutional Court concerning abstract judicial reviews, during which he also referred to the previous speeches. The ground had therefore been prepared for some intense discussions, during which the similarities and differences were brought to light.
The discussions focussed less on the material grounds for the ineffectiveness of laws as on the practice of constitutional courts in cases where the court establishes the unconstitutionality of a law.
The issue of a time limit for the legislator was discussed particularly intensively. Some diametrically opposing views were expressed on the point as to whether the court’s own laws allow for such a time limit and whether and in which cases it makes sense to impose such a time limit. The same also applies to the question of whether the constitutional court should merely establish the unconstitutionality of a standard or whether it should also give indications as to the potential content of a constitutional replacement standard.
There was, however, general agreement on the point that some valuable ideas for their own practice could be drawn from the practice of the German Constitutional Court.
In order to increase the effectiveness of this event, the speeches for this regional conference will also appear in the series of books Godišnjak za Ustavno Pravo (Constitutional Law Yearbook) published by the IRZ.