- Year of publication: 2018
- Source: Show
- Pages: 245-250
- DOI Address: -
Summary On 12 December 2016, 316 deputies of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey submitted a constitutional amendment proposal which is mainly related to changing the parliamentary features of the system of government. The constitutional amendment bill was accepted by the Committee on Constitution of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey with minor changes. Hereafter, the bill was discussed and voted on in the Grand National Assembly. The Grand National Assembly passed the constitution al amendment bill by 339 of 550 votes which is not enough for coming into force but holding a referendum by the President of the Republic2. The constitutional amendment law was promulgated by the President of the Republic on 11 February 2017, and the referendum was held on 16 April 2017. According to the official results declared by the Supreme Electoral Council, 51.41% of the valid votes are in favour, while 48.59% voted for no. Hence, the amendments were approved and are subject to coming into force. This article aims to point out the newly-introduced Turkish system of government by comparing the legislative and executive relations of the relevant constitutional systems which in this case are presidential U.S.A., semi-presidential France and super-presidential Russia. The other purpose of the article is to remark the formation of the judiciary branch of the American, English, German and French constitutional systems for the comparison of the regarding constitutional amendment law provisions. In this respect, the article comprises of a comparative legal/constitutional research in terms of legislative-executive-judiciary relations.
relations between the three main branches semi-presidential system parliamentary system presidential system systems of government constitutional amendments of 2017 Turkish constitutional order Turkish Constitution of 1982 Turkey
The article discusses the use of the Czechs one of the most significant forms of direct democracy – the referendum. The Czechs are not supporters of national popular vote. They still have not worked out a law on a national referendum. Only once a referendum was held at the national level – the EU accession referendum. The citizens of the Czech Republic and the ruling parties are supporters of representative democracy. The situation is slightly different at the local level, where statistics on the numer of organized local referenda are much richer, and the results of the popular vote show the systematically increasing public awareness of the citizens.
The adoption of the new Hungarian Fundamental Law is a result of the victory of right wing and conservative coalition (Fidesz–KDNP) in the election of 2010. The cristian-conservative and national point of view of the history and policy is characteristic for the preamble of Fundamental Law. Its text is very ideological, historical and archaical. The part of this trend is the reincorporation of the Hungarian Saint Crown to the text of Fundamental Law and paralelly the revitalization of the theory of historical constitution too. The interest to the Crown and its symbolical meaning has growed directly after the transition in 1989, but the certain „rehabilitation” and „reactivation” of the Saint Crown in the public law is the result of the constitution-making after 2010. The recognition of Saint Crown as a symbol of the constitutional/state continuity and unity of nation is in this form the new element in the current legal order of Hungary.
The Fidesz–KDNP coalition won the Hungary parliamentary elections of 2010, which was held in April and May. Coalition capturing two-thirds of seats in National Assembly. Despite the fact that in the Election manifesto were no declarations to change the Fundamental Law, the process of creating the new constitution was started after two months after the election. The final draft of the Basic Law was voted on in National Assembly after less than 9 month after the Election and it’s called “the Fidesz’ Fundamental Law”. During four years (2012–2016) the Parliament passed six amendment acts to the Fundamental Law. Whose main purpose was to adapt it to Fidesz’ political philosophy. Thanks to two-thirds majority, the Government coalition could freely shape the Fundamental Law and (after reform of the judiciary) voluntary in its interpretation.
The subject of this article is an analysis of the position of the President of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). TRCP is considered as the so-called quasi-state, also referred to as “unrecognized state”. In the first place a notion of a quasi-state was discussed and reasons for which this systemic being must be subject to analysis from the point of view of constitutional law were given. The main part of the article is dedicated to a detailed description of the most important regulations related to TRNC President, such as method of election, responsibility, his competence towards legislative authorities, executive bodies and judiciary units. Separate considerations were intended for competence of TRNC President with regard to defensiveness and security, which are crucial due to complicated legal and international situation of TRNC. Also, an attempt to evaluate the presidency model applicable in TRNC Constitution in terms of classifying it as one of the models distinguished in the doctrine was taken. Besides, the impact of constitutional regulations of Turkey being the so-called “patron state” for TRNC on TRNC systemic solutions was discussed.
This paper explores some issues, concerning constitutional complaint in the Latin American countries. It starts from the term of constitutional complaint, based both on the Polish and Latin American literature. Such a comparative overview allows then for better understanding the discussed question. Further, there is illustrated different terminology, which is applied in the Latin America. Specifically, there are discussed such issues as the binding legal acts, substantive and procedural premises and the final decisive authorities, which are taking their decisions. This paper also investigates an issue, concerning the function of constitutional complaint in Mexico.
In the face of the European integration, the legal protection of national symbols enjoys momentous significance. The present turbulent times and numerous conflicts, the etiology of which is – e.g. social or political in nature – require an attempt to make a scientific overview of the situation. In this article I will examine the scope of standardization of the protection of national colors in the Polish law, the Italian law and the Community legislation. The study takes into account the historical and contemporary judicial decisions. I will try to answer the question whether the scope of protection of the Community colors in the Polish law is sufficient? The analysis of the examined normative acts has led me to the conclusion that the Polish legislator, after the restoration of independent statehood, attached a great importance to the normative grounds ensuring protection of colors of the national symbols. The Italian constitutional adjustment, compared to the Polish one in the scope of the national colors, is very sparse. Aside from the Community rules, each member state – as a result of historical development – has developed its own model of protection. The colors of the European Union are not expressly protected under the Polish normative regulations. However, de lege ferenda, I reckon that for the interests of legal certainty, the legal status in this field should be amended and relevant norms should be laid down.
The purpose of this article is to present the process of disciplinary liability that the judges of the common courts are subject to especially in relation to the constitutional principle of judges’ independence. In this context, they are discussed the formal aspects of the disciplinary procedure, particularly those concerning initiation of proceedings, recognizing the disciplinary case, joinder of proceedings, appeal and resumption of final judgment. This issue will be used to answer the question, what the function is and what disciplinary proceedings are for in relation to constitutional right to a fair trial and also whether current legislation needs corrections.
This article covers considerations on the issues relating to the rights and freedoms of man and citizen in the light of the Polish Constitution. It is a representation of the commonly accepted democratic values, whose integral part are human rights and their mechanisms.On the basis of the material herein, it can be reasonably assumed that the principle of freedom and of human rights became fundamental in the political system of our state and defined the essence of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland of 1997. Its introduction helped regulate issues relating to freedom and human rights in the Polish systemic law.
© 2017 Adam Marszałek Publishing House. All rights reserved.
Projekt i wykonanie Pollyart