The Constitutional Court of Republic of Slovenia may in its decision specify who is to execute it and also determine the method of said execution. Such a power is vested to it in Article 40 of the Constitutional Court Act. In theory and in practice this instrument has been named as the “method of execution” of a Constitutional Court’s decision. Use of this instrument may present an intervention into the competence of the legislative branch.
Through the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court this “instrument” has evolved into a flexible judicial tool that serves the protection of human rights. However, in a modern state, where separation of powers is a key principle, this instrument pierces through the traditional notion of the position of a Constitutional Court. Decisions which have been assigned a specific method of execution occasionally but persistently raise fundamental questions regarding the importance of constitutional democracy, the functioning of the system of checks and balances and the binding nature of the decisions of the Constitutional Court.
The first part of the master's thesis deals with the principle of separation of powers in the Republic of Slovenia and in this context discusses the position of the Slovenian Constitutional Court. The second part focuses on the question of the legal nature of the above described instrument, paying particular attention to the differences between its legal effects and the effects of a standard legal provision. In addition, this chapter addresses the effects of an assigned method of execution in ongoing legal proceedings and the possible (non)existence of remedies against the assigned method of execution.
Due to the fact, that assigned methods of execution differ greatly between the Constitutional Court’s decisions, so do the legal effects of these methods. Therefore, the thesis in its last part focuses on the question and description of the different forms of this instrument, followed by the description of the legal effects of each individual form.
|
