Venice Commission

The purpose of the study is the systemic analysis of the proposals to modify the electoral system discussed in the Parliament. Initially (in April 2017), the study focused on assessing the systemic impact of the uninominal electoral system (including the draft law), and later (in May 2017) it was expanded to include the mixed electoral system (including the current draft law). The study answers a number of questions:
1) What effects were produced by the current proportional system based on party lists for the political competition, public institutions, governance stability, implementation of reforms in economic and social fields? To what extent does the current system correspond to the challenges of the situation?
2) What is the correlation between the electoral system (proportional, majority, mixed) and challenges, problems of the current situation relevant in light of potential contribution of the first? What political objectives should a new electoral system resolve and contribute to?
3) What effects can have the proposed electoral solutions: the uninominal majority system in 101 constituencies and the mixed majority system in 50 constituencies and in parallel on proportional party lists?
4) What solution can be recommended for a future electoral system according to the policy objectives set?

Just as it led the philosophy of science to gravitate around scientific practice, the abandonment of all foundationalist aspirations has already begun making political philosophy into an attentive observer of the new ways in which constitutional law is practiced. Yet paradoxically, lawyers and legal scholars are not those who understand this the most clearly. Beyond analyzing the jurisprudence that has emerged from the expansion of constitutional justice, and taking into account the development of international and regional law, the ongoing globalization of constitutional law requires comparing the constitutional laws of individual nations. Following Waldron, the product of this new legal science can be considered as ius gentium. This legal science is not as well established as one might like to think. But it can be developed on the grounds of the practice that consists in ascertaining standards. As abstract types of best “practices” (and especially norms) of constitutional law from around the world, these are only a source of law in a substantive, not a formal, sense. They thus belong to what I should like to call a “second order legal positivity.” In this article I will undertake, both at a methodological and an epistemological level, the development of a model for ascertaining global standards of constitutional law.

Part I of this article provides a comparative overview of the origins, structure and functioning of the systems of direct access to constitutional and supreme courts adopted worldwide, addressing Latin American, European, Asian and African jurisdictions, focusing on the structure of the individual constitutional complaint and on admissibility requirements.
Part II will then address possible benefits (if any) of the introduction of such such a system in Italy. After presenting the main features of the Italian system of judicial review, the article will describe proposals that, since 1947, have been presented to introduce a system of direct access to the Italian Constitutional Court in order to supplement the already existing avenues of access to the Court.
Part III will then offer some reflections on the actual advantages (if any) that adoption of such a system would bring to the Italian legal system, compared to the already existing incidenter control of constitutionality ("controllo di costituzionalita in via incidentale").

Bodnár Eszter: A Velencei Bizottság választási ajánlásainak érvényesülése a magyar szabályozásban és bírósági gyakorlatban. Jogtudományi Közlöny 2018/3.

Az Európa Tanács Velencei Bizottsága aktív szerepet játszik Európa választási standardjainak kialakításában. E tevékenysége során általános ajánlásként fogadta el Code of Good Practice in Electoral Matters című dokumentumot, és az egyes országok választási törvényeit egyedi véleményekben méri az ebben megfogalmazott elvárásokhoz. E soft law követelmények kötelező jogi erővel nem, de jelentős politikai autoritással bírnak, és mivel a bíróságok (mind nemzeti, mind nemzetközi szinten) egyre inkább felhasználják a dokumentumot a választási alapelvek értelmezéséhez, közvetetten kikényszeríthetővé is válnak. Magyarországnak az Európa Tanács és a Velencei Bizottság tagjaként figyelemmel kell lennie ezekre az elvárásokra a választási szabályozás és gyakorlat kialakításakor.

After a summary of the organic and specific review proposals of the Italian Constitution, the study focuses on the Constitutional draft for the reduction in the number of Parliamentary members, adopted during the 18th parliamentary term (A.S. 214) and currently awaiting a confirmatory referendum. The circumscribed character of the proposal reflects a referendum structural choice in line with the article 48 It. Cost. as well as a reform policy that has been largely approved by Parliamentary groups, also for the need to give a sign to voters about the public spending reducing. However, some doubts remain about the Constitutional draft capacity to introducing real innovations into the institutional setup because of its essentially quantitative content, lacking a shaping view on Institutions. Sommario: 1. Introduzione. Il DNA di un referendum costituzionale revocato-2. Le modifiche alla Costituzione tra tentativi organici e puntuali-3. La proposta sulla riduzione del numero dei parlamentari-3.1 La puntualità della revisione come scelta di struttura e i suoi riflessi procedurali-3.2 La puntualità della revisione come scelta politica-4. Postilla

Publikacja prezentuje krytyczne spojrzenie na różne instytucje prawa wyborczego i praktykę ich funkcjonowania zarówno w kontekście doświadczeń wyborczych lat 2018-2020 i towarzyszących im zmian prawa, jak i sytuacji związanej ze stanem pandemii i problemów wynikających z konieczności organizacji wolnych wyborów w warunkach nadzwyczajnych. Analizie poddawane są w tym kontekście klasyczne zagadnienia z zakresu prawa wyborczego, takie jak zasady prawa wyborczego (w szczególności zasada wolnych wyborów), prawa wyborcze obywateli, organy wyborcze, proces wyborczy, kampania wyborcza, kontrola wyborów czy też cisza legislacyjna.

W wielu tekstach, których autorami są młodzi badacze prawa konstytucyjnego z różnych ośrodków akademickich, zamieszczono również ocenę obowiązujących w Polsce regulacji prawnych w świetle standardów międzynarodowych, w tym zwłaszcza standardów Rady Europy, a także postulaty de lege ferenda, ukierunkowane na usprawnienie istniejących już procedur wyborczych oraz zapewnienie wyborom do organów przedstawicielskich w najwyższym stopniu demokratycznego charakteru.

Książka adresowana jest nie tylko do studentów wydziałów prawa i administracji, ale również do wszystkich tych, którzy na co dzień zajmują się prawem wyborczym, zarówno w ujęciu praktycznym, jak i teoretycznym. Z pewnością będzie też ciekawą lekturą dla wszystkich zainteresowanych prawem wyborczym i szeroko rozumianym prawem ustrojowym.

[ABSTRACT EN}

The Current Challenges of Electoral Law

The publication presents a critical view on various institutions of electoral law and their functioning in the context of the 2018-2020 elections and the accompanying changes to the law, as well as the situation caused by the pandemic and the problems resulting from the organization of the free elections in extraordinary conditions. The authors analyse classic electoral law issues such as the principles of electoral law (the principle of free elections in particular), citizens’ electoral rights, electoral bodies, the election process, the election campaign, election control, or legislative silence.

Many texts, whose authors are young researchers in constitutional law from different academic centres, contain the assessment of legal regulations in force in Poland in accordance with international standards, especially those set by the Council of Europe, as well as the de lege ferenda demands, which aim at improving existing electoral procedures and ensuring that the elections to representative bodies are fully democratic.

Keywords: electoral law, elections, electoral code, democracy, Constitution, the rule of law.

Implementation of the “Checks and balances” principle as one of the milestones in modern democracies, demonstrates its full complexity when it comes to balancing guaranties of judicial independence and the need to prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the rights. Additional issue in that process is determination of the border line between constitutional and guaranties of judicial independence prescribed by law. Raising that issue opens various questions which go beyond the legal framework itself . Actually it tackles the historical, political and cultural country background. Furthermore, if analyzed from the prospective of the requirements defined in the accession negotiation process with the EU, constitutional guaranties of judicial independence become division criteria that challenge the idea of EU standards’ existence and their unselective application as an accession benchmark. Furthermore, lack of clear and objective criteria of (non)application of the EU standards’ might demotivate candidate countries in their efforts to achieve substantial reform results.

Dürr, Schnutz Rudolf, Constitutional Courts: an endangered species?, in Rousseau, Dominique, ed., Les Cours constitutionnelles, garantie de la qualité démocratique des sociétés ?, Actes du colloque organisé le 12 juillet 2018 par le Tribunal constitutionnel d’Andorre, LGDJ, Lextenso, Issy-les-Moulineaux (2019), pp. 111-136.

Proposed changes to presidential term limits are almost always highly contested, and have attracted international and regional attention from many external actors including governmental organizations (IGOs), and international non-governmental organisations (INGOs). A central question that faces these external actors is the extent to which it is legitimate to take a position in presidential term limit debates. When they have engaged the question, external actors have increasingly focused on the relationship between stability, conflict prevention, constitutionalism and democracy. This chapter considers the policy concerning presidential term limits of three major IGOs, the UN, the AU and the OAS, each of which has had considerable involvement in countries where term limit changes have been linked to conflict. It further discusses the way in which IDEA, an IGO with a softer mandate, has responded to the debate on term limits, as well as the output of a number of other international actors like the Venice Commission, ECOWAS, DRI, the Carter Center and the West African Civil Society Forum (WACSOF). This review of international actors’ responses to the question of presidential term limits suggests an increasing international consensus that, in countries with a history of authoritarianism and weak democratic institutions, presidential term limits can play an important role in strengthening democratic processes and reducing the likelihood of conflict. Importantly, justifications for raising concerns about the removal of term limits are gradually moving from the safer space of demanding that constitutionally established processes be used to more outspoken condemnation of proposals to remove or weaken term limits based on a recognition of the dangers of prolonged incumbency and its links to democratic backsliding.

The present democratic recession has raised three central issues for public lawyers worldwide, which have yet to receive systematic analysis: First, what is new about the nature of contemporary democratic decay and constitutional crises? Second, how have public law mechanisms evolved worldwide in response to the democratic recession? Third, what conceptual and theoretical frameworks have we developed to understand and assess this new reality, and are they adequate? This presentation sought to present a brief initial mapping of the current state of thinking and institutional development in this area, and to make the case that systematic analysis is sorely needed if we are to make sense of this democratic recession, its impact on the evolution of public law, and the adequacy of the public law response to democratic backsliding. The overall aim is to spark discussion on this subject. Feedback and comments are very welcome.

Abstract. “The rule of law, not rule of men”, is the sentence frequently used to express one of the main principles that serve as a milestone of modern democracies. From ancient Greeks to modern legal theory, the rule of law principle increased its importance from basic guaranties established to protect citizens from unlimited power of sovereign to modern concept based on separation of power, whose synergy is framed by checks and balances mechanism. The basic pattern of the rule of law is nowadays consisted in constitutions of numerous countries all around the world, but also recognized as an accession and membership criteria by European Union. The author analyzes an issues of mutual balancing three branches of power in the context of constitutional changes in Serbia requested by the European Commission in the process of accession negotiations for the membership in EU. The author puts in the focus strengthening constitutional guaranties of judicial independence, accessing the draft Constitutional Amendments proposed by Serbian Ministry of Justice.
Key words: rule of law, constitution, separation of power, check and balances, judiciary

Since its creation at the end of the Cold War, the European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission) has been providing technical-legal assistance in the area of constitutional reform to new or restored Central-European democracies. This article suggests that ‘constitutional assistance’, encouraging the adoption of supranational and European legal standards at the national level, promoted the adoption of a counter-majoritarian model of democracy in assisted countries, typical of European constitutionalism.
The article firstly introduces the Venice Commission’s mandate, current developments and distinctive constitutional assistance activity, underlining its main strengths and weaknesses in terms of technicality and policy. It focuses in particular on four constitutional features that have a counter-majoritarian dimension, which the Venice Commission consistently promoted in assisted countries favoring their inclusion at the national level: a. Primacy of International Law; b. Respect for the European Convention on Human Rights Standards; c. Checks and Balances; and d. Constraints on Direct Democracy.
The potential paradox implicit in the idea of a technical body setting constitutional and democratic standards is addressed - and for the most part dismissed – in the final part of the article.

What are the greatest challenges posed to the rule of law and democracy in our days? Which of the branches of government threaten them most? What has been the role of the European institutions? What would need to be done to improve the rule of law and democracy? These are some of the questions that were set us to answer in a case study about Hungary.
In my essay I focus on the role of the European institutions in the protection of rule of law, democracy and human rights. After giving a short overview of the recent constitutional changes in Hungary to help understanding the background, it presents how the constitutional amendment weakened the system of checks and balances, especially the role of the Constitutional Court. In its main part, the essay evaluates through cases the influence of three European institutions (namely the Venice Commission, the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights) on the Hungarian constitutional changes and whether their activity is able to assist, complete or even replace domestic remedy mechanisms. Finally, it makes attempts to seek possible ways for the future to improve the rule of law and democracy.

Dignitas. The Slovenian Journal of Human Rights, 2014/63-64. pp 9-30.

This blog post provides a brief mapping of the way public law has evolved in the past decade to address democratic backsliding and constitutional crises across the globe, and argues that systematic analysis is sorely needed if we are to make sense of the way public law (both domestic and international) has mutated in recent years, and to assess the adequacy of the new mechanisms developed to stem democratic decay. The blog post is a summary of a full-length article I am working on, which may provide the basis for a new book project. I welcome feedback and comments.

At present, the relations between Hungary and the European institutions are rather tense. Following the Constitution adopted in April 2011, several cardinal laws have been adopted. Those opposing the new Constitution and the cardinal laws have
called for Europe’s rejection of the Hungarian reform, labelling it as anti-democratic  and discriminatory and they have raised concern within the European institutions.

In accordance with the obligations undertaken in the process of the accession to the European Union, the three candidate countries in the Western Balkans have initiated or undergone the process of changing their constitutional acts in order to align them with the requirements stemming from Chapter 23 Judiciary and Fundamental Rights. The paper aims to analyse how Montenegro and Serbia approached this commitment as an integral and essential part of the Action Plans for Chapter 23, while Albania did it as a part of the preparation of the country to receive the candidate status and the opening of accession talks. Subsequently, the paper shows that during the drafting process, the three states were guided by the standards defined by the Venice Commission in its opinions and proposals as well as the EC views received within consultative processes they have undertaken. It also points out the differences in the approach to the content of the changes by the European Union and the Venice Commission in the three cases. While Serbia still has to implement these changes, this paper also presents the diverse experience in Montenegro since 2013 and Albania since 2016 in relation to the implementation of the Constitutional amendments in practice and the effects it has had. Furthermore, the paper discusses the effects of the Constitutional reform in the light of the Enlargement Policy considering the latest developments and the fact that the Rule of Law is an essential part of these processes and the EU requirements. Finally, the paper concludes that the Venice Commission, invited by the European Commission, has provided the three states with its opinion guided both by technical, but also political principles, which, as an effect, has produced a diverse approach to how certain elements of the constitution treat the independence and autonomy of the judiciary within the process of integration in the EU.

Proces ustavnih promena neminovno izaziva intenzivne reakcija kako stručne, tako i opšte javnosti. Potreba za najširim dijalogom u okviru ovog procesa više se ne dovodi u pitanje. Ipak, godinama unazad, pitanje ustavnog uređenja više nije isključivo unutrašnje pitanje evropskih država. Članstvo u porodici evropskih naroda, bilo kroz Savet Evrope, bilo kroz Evropsku uniju, podrazumeva i obavezu dostizanja i održavanja određenog nivoa standarda u pogledu organizacije i funkcionisanja pravnog sistema. Jedan od najznačajnijih mehanizama u ovom smislu jeste i prethodna analiza i davanje mišljenja na nacrt ustava od strane Venecijanske komisije ali i uvažavanje stavova koje je Komisija zauzela analizirajući ranije predloge ustava drugih država, i to već u fazi javne rasprave i izrade radnog teksta. Kako su aktuelne ustavne promene u Republici Srbiji sastavni deo pristupnih pregovora sa Evropskom unijom, a u okviru Poglavlja 23, već i samim Akcionim planom za ovo poglavlje, Srbija se obavezala da, u delu koji se odnosi na organizaciju a naročito nezavisnost pravosuđa, Ustav izmeni u skladu sa stavovima Venecijanske komisije. Naizgled, ovo bi trebalo da bude jednostavan zadatak koji u praksi dobija na složenosti usled nekoliko faktora koji su analizirani u ovom radu: Najpre, reč je o pitanju postojanja nedvosmislenih standarda koji regulišu nezavisnost pravosuđa a potom i o njihovoj (ne)selektivnoj primeni na sve države podjednako, a potom i o fleksibilnosti i jednoznačnosti stavova koje je Venecijanska komisija zauzela o konkretnim pitanjima koja se tiču ustavnih garancija u oblasti pravosuđa. Ova pitanja su od suštinskog značaja, kako za njihove domete u oblikovanju novog teksta Ustava, tako i u pogledu izbora konkretnih rešenja kada je reč o sastavu i ovlašćenjima Visokog saveta sudstva i Državnog veća tužilaca, kao tela koja imaju zadatak da osiguraju nezavisnost pravosuđa, ali i načinu izbora i trajanju mandata nosilaca pravosudnih funkcija.

LINK AL VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouAQnUurj7U&t=1519s

Introduce e coordina
Emanuele Rossi
(Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna)
Relatori
Sergio Bartole
(Università degli studi di Trieste)
Josep Maria Castellà Andreu
(Universitat de Barcelona /Commissione di Venezia)
Lorenza Violini
(Università degli Studi di Milano Statale)

S. Bartole, The Internationalisation of Constitutional Law
A View from the Venice Commission, Hart, Oxford, 2020, https://www.bloomsburyprofessional.com/uk/the-internationalisation-of-constitutional-law-9781509941476/

U današnje vreme se sve češće može naići na izraze poput: "Venecijanska komisija je dala mišljenje", "mišljenje Venecijanske komisije se razmatra", "uticaj Venecijanske komisije i njenog mišljenja". Međutim, u domaćoj literaturi ovom važnom telu do sada nije bilo posvećeno mnogo pažnje. To nikako ne umanjuje njen značaj. Ove godine se navršava 30 godina od osnivanja Venecijanske komisije, te je dobra prilika da se napravi presek. Autorka je u ovom radu želela da ukaže na nastanak ovog tela, njegovu organizaciju i članstvo, odnos da drugim telima, ali i, kao najvažnije, zadatak i ciljeve Venecijanske komisije.

In accordance with the obligations undertaken in the process of the accession to the European Union, the three candidate countries in the Western Balkans have initiated or undergone the process of changing their constitutional acts in order to align them with the requirements stemming from Chapter 23 Judiciary and Fundamental Rights. The paper aims to analyse how Montenegro and Serbia approached this commitment as an integral and essential part of the Action Plans for Chapter 23, while Albania did it as a part of the preparation of the country to receive the candidate status and the opening of accession talks. Subsequently, the paper shows that during the drafting process, the three states were guided by the standards defined by the Venice Commission in its opinions and proposals as well as the EC views received within consultative processes they have undertaken. It also points out the differences in the approach to the content of the changes by the European Union and the Venice Commission in the three cases. While Serbia still has to implement these changes, this paper also presents the diverse experience in Montenegro since 2013 and Albania since 2016 in relation to the implementation of the Constitutional amendments in practice and the effects it has had. Furthermore, the paper discusses the effects of the Constitutional reform in the light of the Enlargement Policy considering the latest developments and the fact that the Rule of Law is an essential part of these processes and the EU requirements. Finally, the paper concludes that the Venice Commission, invited by the European Commission, has provided the three states with its opinion guided both by technical, but also political principles, which, as an effect, has produced a diverse approach to how certain elements of the constitution treat the independence and autonomy of the judiciary within the process of integration in the EU.

The aim of this article is to show how (new) modes of governance emerge in EU politics. It seeks to find out how European institutions manage to define new policy tools and modes of governance when their legitimacy is not only contested but it also reveals a regulatory gap. By examining recent debates concerning the ability of the EU to safeguard the rule of law at the supranational level, this article shows that in a field in which politicization raises the pressure to act at the EU level but member states do not delegate more hierarchical powers, the European Commission applies a network approach that spans beyond the EU. This article shows that, in order to strengthen the EU’s input, output, and throughput legitimacy, the Commission is creating a complex multi-institutional framework and has introduced a ‘division of labour’ between several international bodies and organizations. The article focuses not only on the emergence of this network but also on its evolution and expansion.

Proposed changes to presidential term limits are almost always highly contested, and have attracted international and regional attention from many external actors including governmental organizations (IGOs), and international non-governmental organisations (INGOs). A central question that faces these external actors is the extent to which it is legitimate to take a position in presidential term limit debates. When they have engaged the question, external actors have increasingly focused on the relationship between stability, conflict prevention, constitutionalism and democracy. This chapter considers the policy concerning presidential term limits of three major IGOs, the UN, the AU and the OAS, each of which has had considerable involvement in countries where term limit changes have been linked to conflict. It further discusses the way in which IDEA, an IGO with a softer mandate, has responded to the debate on term limits, as well as the output of a number of other international act...

In order to bypass the 10% electoral threshold, a significant number of independent candidates stood for election in 2007 parliamentary elections in Turkey. Having occurred, these independent candidates came upon deprivation of particular rights that political parties enjoy: The right to propaganda on state-run media and being included in the ballots set up in the customs. Taking into consideration of the fact that Turkey is a state party to the European Convention on Human Rights and its Protocol No.1 which provides for the right to free elections in Article 3, these two legal issues require a close examination in terms of supranational human rights law. For this purpose, this article shall address the judgments and admissibility decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Oran Case (App. Nos. 28881/07 & 37920/07, Judgment of 15 April 2014) and Timurhan Case (App. No.28882/07, Admissibility Decision of 16 December 2014) concerning the relationship between individual candidates and free elections. To deal with the issue comprehensively, the correlation among democracy, human rights and good governance shall be analyzed within a framework which is composed of the concept, place and function of the right to political participation as recognized in international human rights law. Demokrasi, Serbest Seçimler ve Bağımsız Adaylar: Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesinin Kararları Üzerine Eleştirel Değerlendirmeler Öz Türkiye'de 2007 yılında gerçekleşen milletvekili seçimlerine 10%'luk seçim barajını delme amacıyla çok sayıda bağımsız aday katılmıştır. Ancak yürürlükte olan mevzuata göre, bağımsız adaylar, başta kamu televizyon kanallarında propaganda yapabilme hakkı ile gümrüklerde verilen oyları elde etme hakkı (gümrüklerde kurulan sandıklarda kullanılan oy pusulalarında yer alma) olmak üzere siyasi partilerin yararlandığı belirli haklardan yararlanamamaktadır. Bu iki hukuki meselenin Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesinin serbest seçim hakkını öngören 1 no'lu Protokolü'nün 3. Maddesinde kapsamında ulusalüstü insan hakları hukuku açısından incelenmesi gerekmektedir. Bu amaç doğrultusunda bu makalede AİHM'nin Oran (App. Nos. 28881/07 & 37920/07, Judgment of 15 April 2014) ve Timurhan (App. No.28882/07, Admissibility Decision of 16 December 2014) başvurularında vermiş olduğu kararlar ele alınacaktır. Meselenin kapsamlı bir şekilde ele alınabilmesi için demokrasi, insan hakları ve iyi yönetim arasındaki korelasyon, ulusalüstü insan hakları hukukunda tanınan siyasi katılma hakkı kavramını, söz konusu hakkın bu alandaki yerini ve işlevini içeren bir çerçevede tahlil edilecektir. Anahtar Kelimeler Serbest seçim • AİHS • Bağımsız aday • Demokrasi • İyi yönetişim • Siyasal katılma • İnsan hakları • Takdir marjı •

" A mature understanding of constitutional institutions is required, which accepts that even after a strong impetus for political reform has to remain with the limits of the Constitution and it is for the competent organ, the Constitutional Tribunal, to decide when these limits have been overstepped " (Punto 130 del documento in esame).

The aim of this article is to show how (new) modes of governance emerge in EU politics. It seeks to find out how European institutions manage to define new policy tools and modes of governance when their legitimacy is not only contested but it also reveals a regulatory gap. By examining recent debates concerning the ability of the EU to safeguard the rule of law at the supranational level, this article shows that in a field in which politicization raises the pressure to act at the EU level but member states do not delegate more hierarchical powers, the European Commission applies a network approach that spans beyond the EU. This article shows that, in order to strengthen the EU’s input, output, and throughput legitimacy, the Commission is creating a complex multi-institutional framework and has introduced a ‘division of labour’ between several international bodies and organizations. The article focuses not only on the emergence of this network but also on its evolution and expansion.