History and systems of control of constitutionality: international experience

Abstract

This article examines the historical evolution of constitutionality control, its concept and its various systems. In the study of modern constitutionalism, the topic of constitutional control, especially from the side of constitutional jurisdiction exercised by constitutional courts, is gaining more and more strength. The control of constitutionality is the supervision of the compatibility of regulatory acts with the constitutional text. From supremacy and constitutional centrality, any laws, to remain valid in the national legal system, must maintain respect, formal and substantive, for the constitutional text. It is at this moment that constitutionality control, which is carried out diffusely by various bodies of judicial power, comes into play. The idea of constitutional review is related to the supremacy of the Constitution over the entire legal system, as well as constitutional rigor and protection of fundamental rights.
 The existence of normative escalation is a necessary prerequisite for constitutional supremacy, since, occupying the constitution of the hierarchy of the normative system, it is in it that the legislator will find the form of legislative development and its content. Moreover, in countries that have a strict Constitution, that is, those that provide for their own amendment a more serious legislative procedure than is provided for by ordinary laws, a kind of regulatory pyramid is established, at the top of which is the Constitution.
 Therefore, the control of constitutionality is a guarantee of the supremacy of basic rights and guarantees provided by the Constitution, which, in addition to setting the boundaries of state power, is also part of the legitimacy of the state itself, defining its duties and enabling the democratic process under the rule of law. Control of constitutionality means checking the perfect adequacy of the law or normative act of the Constitution, checking its formal and material requirements. This is always a comparative examination between a legislative or regulatory act and the Constitution. From this we can say that any legislative or regulatory act that contradicts the Basic Law of the organization of the state must be declared unconstitutional.