Application of the Constitution of Ukraine by courts in the administration of justice through conform interpretation of laws

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The article clarifies the nature of the conformal interpretation of legislation in the meaning agreed with the constitution; establishes the origins of conformal interpretation in a comparative perspective; compares the features of the implementation of conformal interpretation, which can be carried out both by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and by courts of general jurisdiction. It is concluded that the interpretation conformal (agreed) with the Constitution is one of the forms of application of the Constitution by courts in the administration of justice. Conformal interpretation is genetically related to the embodiment in the doctrine of German law and is reflected in the idea that a law cannot be recognized as unconstitutional if there is a variant of its reading (interpretation, interpretation) agreed with the constitution. Conformal interpretation in the context of the experience of Germany is also closely related to the idea of the horizontal effect of human rights, as well as the so-called «Drittwirkung». Such an interpretation can sometimes be debatable from the point of view of judicial activism, if the interpretation option chosen is not consensual and competes with the legitimacy of the legislative branch. Unfortunately, it can also cause conflicts between different courts (for example, between the constitutional and supreme courts). After all, often it is the constitutional courts that carry out conformist interpretation. At the same time, conformist interpretation is one of the important ways to avoid gaps. In the Ukrainian version, conformist interpretation can be associated with both the practice of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and courts of general jurisdiction. As for the Constitutional Court, the basis is Part 3 of Art. 89 of the Law “On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine” (“If the Court, considering a case on a constitutional complaint, recognized the law of Ukraine (its provisions) as being in accordance with the Constitution of Ukraine, but at the same time found that the court applied the law of Ukraine (its provisions), interpreting it in a manner that does not comply with the Constitution of Ukraine, then the Constitutional Court shall indicate this in the operative part of the decision”). However, this article has never been directly applied. It seems quite logical that conform interpretation should be carried out not only by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, but primarily by courts of general jurisdiction. Courts of general jurisdiction have broad opportunities to apply the norms of the Constitution when deciding cases and interpreting current legislation.