This article aims to analyze disputes and discussions on the powers of the President of the Republic, which have been happening since the establishment of the Czech Republic in 1993. These occurred when the President tried to interpret the provisions of the Constitution, took actions beyond their framework, or considered that his powers did not impose an obligation to act automatically. The disputes over the President’s powers were, therefore, not the result of theoretical discussions on the constitutional order of the Czech Republic, but were the result of the President’s involvement in the political life of the country, and above all, the decisions that did not correspond to the opinions and actions of the government. Disputes did not have an impact on a permanent change in the constitutional order. For example, there was no reason for an amendment to the Constitution that would extend, restrict, or clarify those powers.

The position of the president of the Czech Republic after the introduction of direct presidential elections

In 2011, direct presidential elections were introduced in the Czech Republic. The Author examines how this changed the position of the President of the Republic. The prevailing opinion among constitutionalists is that direct elections are an element of creating a strong position of the president in a democratic system, and the president elected in this way should have broad powers and play an important role in the political system of the country. Analyzing the provisions of the constitution and the political activity of the presidents of the Czech Republic, the Author concludes that, contrary to this thesis, the Czech legislator decided to balance the strong legitimacy of direct elections with a limited catalog of competences. This happened because the change in the way the president was elected was a political project, and not the result of a substantive debate on the constitutional order.

The paper is an exploration of using unilateral presidential powers by Donald Trump. The Author hypothesizes that Trump, due to his lack of political experience, was less keen on detailed negotiations of legislative projects with Congress, and more willing to act unilaterally. Analyzing frequency of issuing selected unilateral directives by American presidents since Jimmy Carter, the Author claims that Trump was moderate user of unilateral tools, as several of his immediate predecessors issued more unilateral directives. However, Trump was most eager to act unilaterally in his fourth year of the presidency, due to emergency and national security concerns after the pandemic hit the United States.