The implementation of the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Belarus is mainly within the competence of those state bodies and officers, whom the concrete decision of the Constitutional Court is addressed.
The Constitutional Court can recognize a normative legal act as not having legal force either from the moment of its adoption, or from the moment of the adoption of its decision, as well as from the moment which is provided for by the Constitutional Court’s decision. There are particular difficulties concerning the implementation of those decisions, which recognize the legal norm as not having legal force from the moment of the adoption of this norm. Such difficulties are explained with the fact, that earlier this normative legal act has given birth to particular legal consequences for the citizens, state bodies, legal entities, and the recognition of such norm as not having legal force from the moment of its adoption may cause serious legal quarrels.
The problems concerning the implementation of the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Belarus are not rare. Especially these problems concern the decisions which declare normative act as unconstitutional. The main problem concerning the implementation of such decisions is connected with the correct understanding of the content of the Constitutional Court’s decision by the legislator and the accomplishment of relevant legislative amendment in accordance with the letter and spirit of the Constitutional Court’s decision. Sometimes, the legislator initiates relevant amendments on the basis of the Constitutional Court’s decision, but the real content is distorted in the amendment. The opportunity of the Constitutional Court to suggest “prompt” to the legislator is a real measure for avoiding such problem. There is a justified point of view on the opportunity of negative law-making power by the Constitutional Court. More arguable is the point of view concerning the Constitutional Court’s ability to conduct as a positive law-making body. Really, the Constitutional Court is not a law-making body within the direct content of this word. Like many Constitutional Courts, the Constitutional Court of Belarus also has a power to make a suggestion concerning the necessity to amend the relevant legal provision. But in this cases the law-making bodies are the President, the Parliament, the Government. Meanwhile, the Constitutional Court, formulating its legal position concerning the relevant legal act, indirectly acts as a positive law-making body. There are cases, when the law-making body borrows the relevant formulations for the legal act from the decision of the Constitutional Court.
One of the measures to insure the strict understanding of the Constitutional Court’s decision by the legislator is the Constitutional Court’s practice to interpret its own decisions. The opportunity of such interpretation is provided for by the Law on the Constitutional Court of Belarus. The official interpretation of the decisions of the Constitutional Court is carried out by the Constitutional Court itself and in practice this power is implemented on the basis of the initiative of various state bodies, who are entitled to appeal to the Constitutional Court, as well as of the initiative of the Constitutional Court itself.
Another measure, which helps the law-making and law-implementing bodies to understand the legal position of the Constitutional Court, are the decisions of the Constitutional Court, concerning the practice of the implementation of the decisions adopted by it.
The Constitutional Court uses also other measures to insure the implementation of its decisions by the law-making and law-implementing bodies. As a rule the Constitutional Court indicates in its decision a concrete period for the implementation of its decision. This measure allows the Court to insure more effective control on the implementation of its decision, as well as to suggest more concrete tasks to the legislator on the preparation of the amendments of relevant legal norms.
In order to insure the implementation of its decision the Constitutional Court may also address a suggestion to the relevant state body, mentioning the necessity of implementation of its decision in time and properly.