HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION
Keywords:
Human Rights, Constitution, Constitutional Court and InterpretationAbstract
The Constitutional Court, as a guardian of the Constitution, is obliged to ensure respect for the highest fundamental values, principles and guarantees of the constitutional order. The Constitutional Court exercises its concern for the highest constitutional values in a manner that, by calling upon them and interpreting them, it interprets all other constitutional norms, believing that the other constitutional provisions are a normative expression of the fundamental values and principles. The constitutional judges need to adjudicate and decide not only on the facts but also on the right in a way that, through the prism of the integrity of the highest constitutional values, principles and guarantees, prevents the consequences of the application of provisions that do not meet constitutional values. The majority of judges, in their analyses, legal opinions and arguments, decided on a selective and restrictive approach to interpreting the provisions of the Constitution, which, in my opinion, resulted in a failure to provide a comprehensive interpretation and analysis that would fully address the allegations contained in the initiative.
The goal of this analysis is to contribute to clarifying the longstanding (and still present) dilemmas and controversies related to the concept, nature, characteristics, effects and consequences of the theories, manners and methods of interpreting constitutional values, principles and norms.
References
Alexy, R. (2010). The Dual Nature of Law, Ratio Juris, 23(2), pp. 167–182
Alexy, R. (2010). Two or Three? On the Nature of Legal Principles. Ed. Martin Borowski. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner and Nomos, pp. 9–18
Alexy, R. (2010). The Construction of Constitutional Rights, Law & Ethics of Human Rights, 4, pp. 20–32.
Alexy, R. (2014). Constitutional Rights and Proportionality, Revus -Online, pp. 35-50
Antic, T. (1991). Separate Opinion in Judicial Proceedings and the Practice of the Constitutional Court, Law Faculty Journal of the University of Rijeka, 37( 2).
Erkvania, Tinatin. (2023). Interpretation methods of the constitution in german constitutionalism (distinct aspects). Journal of Law (TSU), 2023(1), pp.111-156
Dworkin, R. (1996). The Moral Reading of the American Constitution, The New York Review.
Hughes E., Charles "We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is", http://c250.columbia.edu› , 2024
Kelsen, H., (2012). Pure Theory of Law, Zagreb, Naklada Breza.
Koshy, A. K. (2022). Interpretation of the constitution: understanding living constitutionalism through framework originalism. Journal of Indian Law and Society, 13(1), XIII-XXVIII.
Limbach, L. (2001). The Federal Constitutional Court.
McClain, Linda C., and Fleming, James E., (2023). Toward a Liberal Common Good Constitutionalism For Polarized Times, Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 46 (3), pp.1123-1148
Möller, K. (2007). Balancing and the Structure of Constitutional Rights, International Journal of Constitutional Law, 5 (3), pp. 453–468
Omejec, J. (2009). On the Changes in the Structure of Croatian Constitutional Justice, in Barbic, J., Croatian Constitutional Justice, Zagreb, HAZU.
Posner, A., Richard. (1995). Overcoming Law, Harvard University Press.
Poscher, R. (2007). Einsichten, Irrtümer und Selbstmissverständnis der Prinzipientheorie, In, Ed. Jan-R. Sieckmann, Die Prinzipientheorie der Grundrechte, Baden-Baden: Nomos, pp.59–79
Samar, J. Vincent. (2019). Rethinking Constitutional Interpretation to Affirm Human Rights and Dignity, 47 Hastings Const. L.Q. 83.
Desenting opinion judge Darko Kostadinovski on a Resolution No. 137/2019 (Издвоено мислење по предметот У.бр.137/2019 – Уставен суд на Република Северна Македонија
