ARM-2011-1-001
a)
Armenia / b) Constitutional Court / c) / d) 25.02.2011 / e) DCC-943 / f) On the conformity with
the Constitution of Article 426.3, part 1, point 4, Article 426.4, part 1,
point 1 of the RA Code of Criminal Procedure and Article 69, part 12 of the RA
Law “On Constitutional Court”/ g) to
be published in Tegekagir (Official Gazette) / h).
Keywords of the systematic thesaurus:
1.1.4.4 Institutions – Constitutional
Justice – Constitutional Jurisdiction-Relations with other institutions -
Courts
1.5.4.3 Institutions – Decisions –
Types-Finding of constitutionality or unconstitutionality
1.6.7 Institutions –Effects- Influence on
State organs
2.3.2 Sources –Techniques of
review – Concept of constitutionality dependent on a specific interpretation
Keywords of the alphabetical index:
Decisions on constitutionality /
legal positions.
Headnotes
The failure to recognize as a new
circumstance the decisions of the Constitutional Court, in the operative part
of which it is stated that the challenged norm is recognized as constitutional
in the frames of the Constitutional Court’s legal positions, does not provide
with opportunity of restoration and protection of violated human rights and freedoms.
Summary
On
February 25, 2011, the RA Constitutional Court, considering the case regarding
conformity of Point 4, Part 1, Article 426.3 and Point 1, Part 1, Article 426.4
of the RA Code of Criminal Procedure and Part 12, Article 69 of the RA Law on
“The Constitutional Court” with the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia on
the basis of the individual complaints, held:
1. Point 4, Part
1, Article 426.3 of the RA Code of Criminal Procedure is in conformity with the
Constitution of the
2. Point 1, Part
1, Article 426.4 of the RA Code of Criminal Procedure, within the accorded contents in
law-enforcement practice, pursuant to which, does not provide with the
possibility of restoration of human rights violated as a result of
implementation of the law (other legal norm) with the interpretation differing
from the RA Constitutional Court’s legal
positions, by the means of review of the case on the basis of the new
circumstances, recognize as contradicting the requirements of Articles 3, 6,
18, 19 and 93 of the Constitution of the Republic of Armenia.
In the mentioned
Decision, the Constitutional Court emphasized that, acknowledging the challenged
act in conformity with the Constitution, the Constitutional Court, interpreting
the challenged legal norms, reveals their constitutional-legal contents,
acknowledging in the operative part of the Decision conformity of the
given norms with the Constitution or conformity with the Constitution in the
framework of concrete legal positions, pointing out:
- those legal
frameworks where the perception and implementation of the norms ensures its
constitutionality;
- those legal
frameworks where the implementation and interpretation of the given norm beyond
their frames shall lead to non-constitutional consequences;
- those
constitutional – legal standards, on the basis of which, the competent body of
public power shall ensure additional legal regulation of fully-fledged
implementation of the given norm.
The
Constitutional Court took as a ground the fundamental position, according to
which, the meaning of the constitutional justice is guaranteeing the supremacy
of the Constitution and its direct action, and non of procedural norms or its
inaccurate formulation can hinder the realization of the constitutional
function and guaranteeing of the rule of law.
The
Constitutional Court has mentioned that proceeding from the current legislative
formulations, the judicial practice by not recognizing as a new circumstance
the decisions of the Constitutional Court, in the operative part of which it is
stated that the norm is recognized as constitutional in the frames of the legal
positions, does not provide with opportunity of restoration and protection of
the violated human rights and freedoms. Such decisions concern the cases, when
a non-constitutional situation occurs not because of lacuna or ambiguity of the
norm, but because of implementation of the norm with an interpretation
contradicting the Constitution. In such a situation the implementation of the
principle of guaranteeing the rule of law, as well as the supremacy of
Constitution, is put into the spot.
Languages:
Armenian