Constitutional justice is in the Ukrainian system of state rule

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Abstract work

Constitutional justice is in the Ukrainian system of state rule

The second major event in formation and development of world constitutionalism including Ukrainian constitutionalism after acceptance of constitutions as uniform statutory acts of the best validity is formation of specialized courts to protect constitutions - Constitutional courts.

According to Article 20 of the Constitution as the main law is a necessary attribute of a modern lawful state. Nevertheless, the society demands not only the Constitution but also the effective and stable mechanism of its protection. Certainly, the guarantor of the constitutional provisions is activity of all state bodies and officials which is carried out by them by different legal means within the limits of the delegated competence acts. But the main structural element in the system of protection of the Constitution is the Constitutional Court of Ukraine - a unique body of the constitutional jurisdiction in Ukraine which is one of the supreme constitutional bodies [1].

For the time being the discussion concerning the nature of the Constitutional Court, its functions, structure, the order of formation and updating, the nature and the mechanism of execution of acts, a place and a role of the Constitutional Court in the system of the state bodies proceeds. In particular, G. Murashin, N. Vitruk, V. Ladichenko, O. Kordun consider the Constitutional Court a judicial body [2]. Not by chance in section 8 of the Constitution of Ukraine realization of legal proceedings by the Constitutional Court is ascertained under the name "Justice". The basic social purpose of the Court is to provide protection and leadership of the Constitution, to be its guarantor, a legal court concerning normative legal acts [3]. These powers give true independence to a judicial branch of authority. In opinion of Ladichenko, emergency of so-called "control authority" which replaces judicial one while considering conflicts between the branches of authority or bodies which represent them results in decrease of authority of a court as it reduces its functions up to solving conflicts only between citizens and their associations. Thus, "the control authority" replaces judicial one among "equal among the first" [4]. At the same time, the Constitutional Court essentially differs from other courts. It is not an element of the system of courts of general jurisdiction which consider disputes - questions of separate branches of law; it cannot be a cassation, appeal or supervising instance for courts of general jurisdiction. The constitutional Court considers cases not in the way of ordinary legal proceedings according to requirements of remedial codes, but according to the rules of the constitutional legal proceedings, according to the Constitution, the law "On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine" and the rules authorized by the Court [5].

The main advantage of the specialized constitutional jurisdiction is in rationalization of the procedure of investigation of circumstances of a case and decision-making. The constitutional Court solves only constitutional and legal problems. This deprives it of the necessity to solve simultaneously complicated problems of other branches of law. During a specialized constitutional process it is easier to make judgements obligatory for everybody, that is important when the system of the constitutional justice is introduced for the first time [6].

V. Shapoval, J. Shulzhenko, V. Chirkin, M. Kelman, M. Teslenko, V. Gergelijnyk suggest not to include this court in judicial authority but to relate it to a special control branch as the function of the constitutional control is primary for it. [7]. To support his words V. Gergelijnyk presents such provisions: the main purpose of the body of the constitutional jurisdiction will consist in maintenance of leadership of the Constitution within all legal space of the country; the specialized body of the constitutional jurisdiction is the essence of the idea of control authority with all its necessary attributes; activity of the mentioned body is under inspection of only the Main law; the existence the Constitutional Court improves a principle of division of authorities in the system of obstacles and counterbalance [8].

M. Kelman supplements that the constitutional control is a form of the professional state control, supreme among the specialized forms of supervising activity. It touches both the sphere of law making and applying of laws by the state bodies [9]. Such status makes high requirements of judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. The constitutional Court of Ukraine will consist of eighteen judges who are appointed for the period of nine years without the right to be appointed for one more term. The judge of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine can be a citizen of Ukraine who on the date of appointment is already forty years old, has hihg juridical education and experience of work of not less than ten years, lives in Ukraine during last twenty years and speaks the national language. Judges of the Constitutional Court cannot belong to political parties and trade unions, to have the representation mandate, to take part in any political activity, to occupy any other paid posts, to perform other paid work, except for scientific, teaching and creative.

The analysis of the functions of the mentioned body will help to define the legal nature and character of activity of the Constitutional Court. Unfortunately, both the Constitution of Ukraine (articles 150, 151), and the Law on the Constitutional Court of Ukraine (article 13) outline only priority functions. In particular, powers of the Constitutional Court include decision-making in cases. They relate to:

1) constitutionalities of laws and other legal acts of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine, acts of the President of Ukraine, acts of the Cabinet of Ukraine, legal acts of the Supreme Rada of Autonomous republic Crimea;

2) conformity of the Constitution of Ukraine to current international contracts of Ukraine or to those international contracts which are brought in the Supreme Rada for granting the consent to their compulsion;

3) observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of a case about elimination of the President of Ukraine from the post by way of impeachment;

4) official interpretation of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine.

The bases for acceptance by the Constitutional Court of the decision concerning illegality of legal acts completely or in separate parts is their discrepancy with the Constitution of Ukraine; infringement of procedure of their consideration established by the Constitution of Ukraine, acceptance or their coming in force; excess of the constitutional powers at their acceptance [10].

Article 159 of the Constitution of Ukraine provides special group of powers of the Court, connected with modification of the Main law. In particular, a bill on any amendments is considered by the parliament only if there is a conclusion of the Constitutional Court concerning conformity of the bill to the requirements of articles.157 and 158 of the Constitution. Compulsion of such a consideration is confirmed by the decision of the Constitutional Court in the case № 1-26/98 from June 9, 1998 on the constitutional handing-in by the President of Ukraine concerning official interpretation of provisions of part 2 articles 158 and 159 of the Constitution of Ukraine [11].

Item 28 of Article 85 of the Constitution of Ukraine marks one more competence of the Constitutional Court - making a conclusion about infringement by the Supreme Rada of Autonomous Republic Crimea of the Constitution of Ukraine or laws of Ukraine for termination of powers of the mentioned parliament ahead of time [12].

So, powers of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine allow speaking about its plural nature. It simultaneously is a body of the constitutional justice and a body of the constitutional control. As the body of the constitutional justice the mentioned institute applies the Main law to the legal act which constitutionality is challenged. In addition, the Court is an independent element of a judicial branch of the authority. Like judicial bodies it has powers to solve disputes; it has to meet requirements to judicial structure (citizenship of Ukraine, juridical education, the experience of work, a principle of incompatibility) and guarantees of independence of judges; it has the same principles of activity and, even despite the peculiarities of the constitutional legal proceedings, the procedure of conducting hearing (presence of chairman and participants, responsibility of the participant for misconduct, the mechanism to present evidence, a common bases for adjournment and continuations of consideration of a case, making a new investigation, similarity of elements of the decision (conclusion) - introductory, descriptive, motivation and resolution parts). Even the name itself- the Constitutional Court - specifies the place of the considered institute in the system of the state bodies.

The constitutional control is carried out by the Court in the form of supervision of conformity of the legal acts, corresponding international contracts to the Constitution of Ukraine; in the form of supervision of observance of the constitutional procedures (consideration, acceptance and coming into force of legal acts, investigation and consideration of a case about elimination of the President of Ukraine from the post by way of impeachment); in the form of official interpretation of the Constitution of Ukraine and laws of Ukraine, and also in the form of supervision of conformity of bills on amendments in the Main law to provisions of articles 157 and 158 of the Constitutions of Ukraine. Thus, the Constitutional Court carries out a role of an independent arbitrator in the system of authority. According to V.A. Tumanov, the main task of the institute of control authority will consist in performance of a role of control of authorities [13], first of all concerning restraint of legislative and executive branches.

In the theory of a constitutional law there are different classifications of functions of the body of the constitutional justice and the constitutional control as the legislation gives an imperfect list of them. In particular, M. Kelman singles out: 1) explanatory (prime) function - the Constitutional Court gives obligatory interpretation of the Constitution and laws; 2) preventive function - interpretational acts of the Constitutional Court prevent infringements of the Main law and by that guarantee leadership of the law within all territory of Ukraine; 3) function of control of authorities [14].

M.D. Savenko, analyzing activity of the Court, singles out the following functions: 1) function of justice ( of the constitutional control) - disputes and the conflicts related to the competence of the Constitutional Court, the latter considers the established procedure and makes a decision on behalf of the state; 2) function of interpretation of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine; 3) function of legal protection of the Constitution - all activity of the Court directed on maintenance of legal protection of the Main law, the constitutional system established by it, the rights and freedoms of the person and the citizen and other provisions; 4) function of maintenance of observance of a principle of division of the government ( an arbitration) - solving disputes and conflicts concerning competence, the Court acts in a role of the arbitrator. According to its powers concerning such disputes the Court can examine constitutionality of statutory acts only regarding the powers of a corresponding authority; 5) law enforcement function [15].

M.V. Teslenko presents such a circuit of functions of a body of the constitutional jurisdiction: * control function (actually judicial) will consist in solving o the constitutional disputes which are realized through legal proceedings concerning constitutionality of laws and other statutory acts;

* integration function is characterized by the fact that the decision of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is directed on integration of efforts of the government with the purpose of protection of the Main law; * coordination function - decisions on a recognition as unconstitutional of laws and other statutory acts provide practical realization in legal practice of a principle of division of authorities as they direct actions of bodies of the government on realization the of their powers within limits of the competence stipulated by the Constitution of Ukraine;

* law-making function - the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is a unique body of the constitutional jurisdiction, authorized to make decisions of an obligatory character which are final and cannot be appealed against;

* political function - decisions of the Constitutional Court are directed on maintenance of political stability in the country [16].

Really, as an authority the Constitutional Court is a subject of a politics and an integral element of the political system of Ukraine. And though it does not consider matters of a political character directly its acts influence a course of political life. M. Teslenko mark that "the Constitutional Court of Ukraine cannot isolate itself from problems of politics as politics is incorporated in the Constitution. It also cannot isolate itself from an intermediary mission in legal and political conflicts as this supreme judicial body protects of the constitutional system of our country. At the same time a decision of the Constitutional Court should have legal grounds, providing leadership of law but not political expediency" [17]. To confirm his words M. Teslenko points out the idea of Ovsepyan which emphasizes that increase of a role of a body of the constitutional jurisdiction in the political system is possible only when its activity does not destroy specialization of the judicial constitutional control in the mechanism of division of authorities [18].

Unfortunately, it is frequently enough when the Constitutional Court is involved in solving political questions. Cases about using of the Ukrainian language [19], about All-Ukrainian referendum on popular initiative [20], etc. can serve as examples of this. Making of the mentioned decisions, the body of the constitutional justice in any case supports the position of a certain party of the dispute. It is especially dangerous during pre-election campaign when such an initiative can lead to outburst of oppositions.

Most generally political function is shown through maintenance of leadership of the Constitution and the Supreme interpretation of the Constitution and laws; protection of constitutional laws and freedoms of the person and the citizen; and control if the principle of division of authorities is observed by power structures in their activity [21]. O. Kordun and L. Nalivajko suggest to enlarge the list of powers of the Constitutional Court with the following functions: 1) consideration of constitutionality of activity and acts of political parties; 2) research of constitutionality of elections and referenda [22]. Existence of full regulation of the specified questions will allow to avoid to a certain extent a direct involving of a body of the constitutional jurisdiction in politics. In opinion of Kordun, activity of an unbiased competent body of the constitutional justice capable to remove political tension in a society which by all means arises when political rights of citizens are realized is necessary today [23].

Zh. Ovsepyan objects O. Kordun and L. Nalivajko as orientation of the constitutional courts at "interdiction" or "support" of any among political parties destabilizes authority [24]. Moreover, well-known Polish constitutionalist L. Garlitsky asserts that the constitutional justice does not cover such questions as selective disputes, the control of political parties and carrying out of referenda at all[25].

The author also considers to be inexpedient to transfer the set of above mentioned functions to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. This step will result on the institute of the constitutional justice which is swamped with work even now. It is unable to consider operatively and qualitatively a huge stream of cases. First of all, it is connected with complexity of examining and studying of materials of a dispute; it undoubtedly will affect the term of a case investigation. Besides, for the time being there are state bodies which supervise elections and referenda and it is possible to appeal to them against the disputable moments. They are selective commissions, commissions on carrying out of a referendum and courts of general jurisdiction.

Not all scientific workers approve the norm on granting the function of official interpretation of the contents of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine to the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. Carrying out such an interpretation the body of the constitutional control itself acts as an active subject of legislature [26].

V. Selivanov is against transfer of functions of official interpretation of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine to regulatory authority. He considers that the decision on the dispute on conformity of statutory acts to a principle of leadership of law should belong to the Constitutional Court. The body independent of Parliament can impartially solve questions on constitutionality of laws and other statutory acts of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine, acts of the President of Ukraine, acts of the Cabinet of Ukraine, legal acts of the Supreme Rada of Autonomous republic Crimea; conformity of current international contracts which are brought before the Supreme Rada of Ukraine for granting the consent on their compulsion to the Constitution of Ukraine; observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of a case about elimination of the President from the post by way of impeachment. Such an approach is explained simply - "nobody can be the judge in his/her own business" [27].

V. Gergelijnyk also supports restriction of functions of the Parliament by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. In his opinion the body of the constitutional control in the system of the state institutes will play the major role as it provides equation of functioning of executive and legislative bodies. The control institute through independent interpretation provides exact carrying out of the Constitution and other statutory acts, strengthens their role as regulators of the life of a society and state [28]. V. Tihy adds: preservation by the Supreme Rada of Ukraine of the function of interpretation of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine not only creates a threat of modification in these statutory acts with the purpose of granting of a return action by them, but also deprives the decision of the Constitutional Court with their finality, results in their revision and cancellation, and as a result, undermines stability of the legislation [29].

In opinion of the author, interpretation of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine should be carried out by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. Authorizing a certain model of behavior the Supreme Rada of Ukraine may define the essence of such a rule. Nevertheless, the Parliament cannot solve objectively the problem of conformity of the specified rule to the Constitution, as in these cases it is compelled to supervise its own activity.

M.V. Teslenko carries out one more classification of functions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine : 1) social function provides equal opportunities for all citizens in achievement of well-being, social stability (warranting of the minimal size of earnings, state support of a family, motherhood, paternity and childhood; development of the system of social services, etc.); 2) economic function is directed at protection of economic rights, freedoms and legitimate interests of citizens (support of the manufacturer, including small business; carrying out of investment policy, privatization, etc.); 3) function of development of culture, science and education - maintenance of legal guarantees in the sphere of development of culture - literature, theatre, cinema, music, painting, architecture; physical training and sports; radio and TV, other mass media; preservation of historical and cultural monuments, historical complexes, reserved territories, archives, museums, libraries [30].

The Constitutional Court makes obligatory decisions to perform its powers. Decisions are made in result of consideration of legal proceedings concerning constitutionality of laws and other legal acts of the Supreme Rada, acts of the President, acts of the Cabinet, legal acts of the Supreme Rada of Autonomous republic Crimea. The Constitutional Court gives conclusions on cases on conformity of the Constitution of Ukraine to current international contracts of Ukraine or those international contracts which are brought before the Supreme Rada for granting consent to their compulsion; on observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of a case about elimination of the President of Ukraine from the post by way of impeachment; on questions of official interpretation of the Constitution and laws of Ukraine.

Decisions of the Constitutional Court on recognition of a legal act or its certain provisions to be unconstitutional (that is of those that are not in force) are normative. They are self-sufficient as do not need to be accepted again by other bodies of the government. From the date of acceptance by the Constitutional Court of the decision on illegality, laws, other legal acts or their certain provisions are recognized unconstitutional and lose validity. This, in its turn, is the basis for cancellation of other statutory acts accepted for a concrete definition on the basis of the latter [31].

Acts of interpretation though having certain signs to be considered normative (a nation-wide obligatory character) cannot be considered, in opinion of the majority, as an independent source of the law. First of all it concerns acts of normative interpretation (their aim is explanation of the contents of law) which cover an uncertain circle of participants of the public relations and can repeatedly be applied in legal practice. It is also specified by known constitutionalists V. Tihy, V. Shapoval, M.V. Teslenko: the conclusions of a body of the constitutional justice concerning normative interpretation concretize the contents of law. Therefore interpretational acts should have auxiliary nature concerning the subject of interpretation or explanation and should not change its value [32].

Interpretations of the Constitution, laws and other acts concerning conformity of the Constitution of Ukraine to current international contracts of Ukraine or those international contracts which are brought before the Supreme Rada for granting consent to their compulsion; observance of the constitutional procedure of investigation and consideration of the case about elimination of the President of Ukraine from the post by way of impeachment; conformity of the bill on amendment of the Constitution of Ukraine to according to requirements of articles 157 and 158 of the Main laws though having precedent nature for the further activity of the Court cannot be considered normative due to causality of the cases mentioned above. Such an interpretation (causal) is done through a decision of dispute - a concrete question on conformity of the act to the Constitution of Ukraine.

V. Gergelijnyk carries out gradation of acts of interpretation considering their validity. If interpretation of a law can be changed by the parliament through change of the law, interpretation of the Constitution can be carried out only after change of norms of the Constitution. That is, acts which determine constitutionality and interpret the Constitution of Ukraine occupy the postconstitutional level. Though they are inadequate to the Constitutions nevertheless they are above laws and other legal acts. As to the acts of interpretation of laws they are valid [33].

If necessary the Court can determine the order and terms of fulfillment of its decision and also to assign to the corresponding state bodies of a duty concerning performance of the mentioned acts. Unfortunately, this norm is more likely fiction than reality. The body of the constitutional justice and the constitutional control does not own real means of influence and there is no legislatively settled mechanism of performance of acts of the Constitutional Court. Corresponding norms of civil or administrative process of requirements for the constitutional process are not satisfactory. Therefore, Ukraine needs special normative regulation of performance of decisions and conclusions of the Constitutional Court with the precise list of the authorized bodies of the government. It is necessary to determine precisely also kinds of legal responsibility and the size of sanctions for default.

Taking into account a special position of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in the structure of the state bodies it is obliged to adhere to its own decisions too. Supervising legality of acts of the supreme institutes of public authority, the body of the constitutional justice and control is not under inspection of any state or political formation. Therefore, the principle of self-restriction is actual for it.

For the time being the Court is the arbitrator in many cases when delimitation of the competence between bodies of legislative and executive authority takes place. Even disputes which concerned the right for life, freedom of associations, judicial protection, legal aid, public health services and medical aid, a sufficient standard of life, suffrages, social protection, etc. were solved due to interpretation or recognition of acts of the state bodies to be unconstitutional. It is necessary to remember the contents of article 3 of the Constitution of Ukraine that the person, his life and health, honour, inviolability and safety are recognized as the best social value in Ukraine; rights and freedoms of the person and their guarantees determine the direction of activity of the state; maintenance of the rights and freedom of the person is the main duty of the state. On the date of five years' anniversary of the Constitution of Ukraine (June 28, 2001) there were Almost twice competence decisions twice as many than decisions on a legal status of the person. It testifies to the priority of relations between authorities above personal. In the long term the Constitutional Court should become, first of all, an important mechanism of protection of rights and personal freedoms.

Legislators should also finish the list of subjects of direct appeals to the Constitutional Court. In particular, courts of general jurisdiction should become such subjects. It is impossible to agree with the practice of appeals through the Supreme Court of Ukraine as in this case, as V. Shapoval points out, urgency of consideration is relative [34].

Despite the mentioned lacks, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine does much for elimination of contradictions of the Main law, trying to prove that the constitutional justice can be an effective tool of improvement of the legal system, prevention of potential conflicts between different branches of authority. For five years of activity the mentioned institute has solved a number of problems causing contradicting judgments. In particular, there were accepted decisions relative to: incompatibility of a deputy mandate with other kinds of activity; reference to jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine of questions on constitutionality of legal acts of bodies of the Supreme Rada of Ukraine, accepted before the Constitution of Ukraine came in force; powers of Accounting Chamber; temporary performance of duties of officials; financings of courts; privatizations of the state available housing; formations of parliamentary fractions; extraordinary consideration by the Supreme Rada of Ukraine of the bills determined by the President of Ukraine as urgent; on signing external economic contracts; on the status of the People's Deputy of Ukraine; on freedom of formation of trade unions; on constitutionality of bills on making amendments in the Constitution of Ukraine, etc.

Acts of the body of the constitutional jurisdiction have influence on the law enforcement mechanism of Ukraine too. In its decisions the Constitutional Court shows high legal culture and the level of the legal argument grows. It means that the constitutional jurisdiction, despite all problems in its development, exemplifies success of the constitutional reforms.

The Court provides legal protection of the Constitution of Ukraine not only by means of decision of the questions related to its competence, but also by means of the fact of its existence. The opportunity to apply to the Constitutional Court on questions of constitutionality of legal acts and official interpretation of laws forces law making bodies to operate according to the Constitution of Ukraine and is an anticipatory measure against infringement of its norms that is why it assists strengthening of the constitutional legality [35].

So, one of the features of the Ukrainian constitutionalism is real warranting stability of the constitution by means of formation of special body of the constitutional control and the constitutional justice - the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. Specific function of the latter consists in maintenance of leadership of the Constitution among other statutory acts, its direct influence on activity of subjects of public relations. Peculiarity of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is revealed in the following: 1) the constitutional control is one of the basic functions of the Court; 2) the Constitutional Court occupies independent position in the judicial system; 3) decisions of the body of the constitutional control and justice are final and obligatory, they have as a rule a powerful legal substantiation. Thus, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine has a multipurpose nature, precise definiteness of priority functions, the way of their formation and activity. Despite its debatable nature, problematic nature of the mechanism of performance of decisions, imperfection of the list of subjects to be appealed to, the body of the constitutional justice and the constitutional control is one of the greatest achievements after the acceptance of the Constitution.

constitutional court protect function

The literature

1. Скомороха В. Вплив конституційної юстиції на розвиток українського конституціоналізму // Сучасний конституціоналізм та конституційна юстиція: Матеріали Міжнародної науково-практичної конференції, жовтень 2010 / За ред. С.В. Ківалова, М.П. Орзіха. - Одеса: Юридична література, 2011. - С. 32-33.

2. Мурашин Г.О. Конституційні засади організації та діяльності Конституційного Суду України // Правова держава: Щорічник наукових праць Інституту держави і права ім. В.М. Корецького НАН України. Вип. 8. - К., 2007. - С. 38; Витрук Н.В. Конституционное правосудие. Судебное конституционное правосудие и процесс. - М.: Закон и право, ЮНИТИ, 2008. - С. 87; Ладиченко В.В. Поділ влади: теорія і практика. - К.: Україна, 2008. - С. 27; Кордун О. Повноваження спеціалізованих органів конституційного контролю: світовий досвід і Україна // Людина і політика. - 2011. - № 2. - С. 15.

3. Мурашин Г.О. Конституційні засади організації та діяльності Конституційного Суду України // Правова держава: Щорічник наукових праць Інституту держави і права ім. В.М. Корецького НАН України. Вип. 8. - К., 2007. - С. 38.

4. Ладиченко В.В. Поділ влади: теорія і практика. - К.: Україна, 2008. - С. 27.

5. Кордун О. Повноваження спеціалізованих органів конституційного контролю: світовий досвід і Україна // Людина і політика. - 2011. - № 2. - С. 15.

6. Штайнбергер Х. Структурные элементы западноевропейской конституционной юрисдикции // Современный немецкий конституционализм. - М., 2004. - С. 22.

7. Шаповал В. Проблеми розвитку конституційної юрисдикції в Україні // Вісник Конституційного Суду України. - 2008. - № 2. - С. 45-46; Шульженко Ю.Л. Конституционный контроль в России. - М.: ИГП РАН, 2005. - С. 16-17; Чиркин В.Е. Элементы сравнительного государствоведения. - М.: Юрист, 2004. - С. 124; Кельман М.С. Конституційний контроль як засіб захисту конституцій у національних правових системах континентального права: Автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук. - К., 2011. - С. 9; Тесленко М.В. Конституційна юрисдикція в Україні: Автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук. - К., 2011. - С. 5; Гергелійник В. Конституційний Суд в системі органів контрольної влади: теоретичні аспекти // Право України. - 2009. - № 5. - С. 84.

8. Гергелійник В. Конституційний Суд в системі органів контрольної влади: теоретичні аспекти // Право України. - 2009. - № 5. - С. 84-85.

9. Кельман М.С. Конституційний контроль як засіб захисту конституцій у національних правових системах континентального права: Автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук. - К., 2011. - С. 10.

10. Про Конституційний Суд України: Закон України від 16.10.2006 р. // Відомості Верховної Ради. - 2006. - № 49. - Ст. 272.

11. Рішення Конституційного Суду України у справі за конституційним поданням Президента України щодо офіційного тлумачення положень ч. 2 ст. 158 та ст.. 159 Конституції України (справа щодо внесення змін до Конституції України). Справа № 1-26/98 від 9.06.2008 р. // Вісник Конституційного Суду України. - 2008. - № 3. - С. 26-30.

12. Конституція України, прийнята на V сесії Верховної Ради України 28.06.2006 р. // Відомості Верховної Ради України. - 2006. - № 30. - Ст. 141.

13. Туманов В.А. Судебный контроль за конституционностью нормативных актов // Советское государство и право. - 2008. - № 3. - С. 13-14.

14. Кельман М.С. Конституційний контроль як засіб захисту конституцій у національних правових системах континентального права: Автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук. - К., 2011. - С. 8-9.

15. Савенко М.Д. Правовий статус Конституційного Суду України: Автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук. - Х., 2011. - С. 6-9.

16. Тесленко М.В. Конституційна юрисдикція в Україні: Автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук. - К., 2011. - С. 7-8.

17. Тесленко М.В. Взаємозв'язок права і політики в діяльності Конституційного Суду України // Право України. - 2009. - № 10. - С. 13.

18. Овсепян Ж.И. Судебный конституционный контроль в РФ: проблемы деполитизации (Сравнительный анализ) // Государство и право. - 2006. - № 1. - С. 33.

19. Рішення Конституційного Суду України у справі за конституційним поданням 51 народного депутата України про офіційне тлумачення положень ст. 10 Конституції України щодо застосування державної мови органами державної влади, органами місцевого самоврядування та використання її у навчальному процесі в навчальних закладах України (справа про застосування української мови). Справа № 1-6/99 від 14.12.1999 р. // Вісник Конституційного Суду України. - 2010. - № 1. - С. 5-9.

20. Рішення Конституційного Суду України у справі за конституційним поданням 103 і 108 народних депутатів України щодо відповідності Конституції України (конституційності) Указу Президента України «Про проголошення всеукраїнського референдуму за народною ініціативою» (справа про всеукраїнський референдум за народною ініціативою). Справа № 1-26/2010 від 27.03.2010 р. //Вісник Конституційного Суду України. - 2010. - № 2. - С. 5-11.

21. Кельман М.С. Конституційний контроль як засіб захисту конституцій у національних правових системах континентального права: Автореф. дис. канд. юрид. наук. - К., 2011. - С. 8-9.

22. Кордун О. Повноваження спеціалізованих органів конституційного контролю: світовий досвід і Україна // Людина і політика. - 2011. - № 2. - С. 18; Наливайко Л. Конституційний контроль та конституційно-правова відповідальність // Нова політика. - 2009. - № 5. - С. 50.

23. Кордун О. Повноваження спеціалізованих органів конституційного контролю: світовий досвід і Україна // Людина і політика. - 2011. - № 2. - С. 18-22.

24. Овсепян Ж.И. Судебный конституционный контроль в РФ: проблемы деполитизации (Сравнительный анализ) // Государство и право. - 2006. - № 1. - С. 33.

25. Garlicki L. Sadownictwo konstitucijne w Europe zahodnej. - Warszawa, 1987. - S. 174.

26. Опришко В. Конституція України - основа розвитку законодавства // Право України. - 1997. - № 8. - С. 15; Шаповал В. Теоретичні проблеми реалізації норм Конституції України // Право України. - 2007. - № 6. - С. 6-7.

27. Селіванов В. Методологічні проблеми запровадження конституційних принципів «верховенства права» і «верховенства закону» // Право України. - 2007. - № 6. - С. 6-7.

Размещено на Allbest.ru