Prethodno priopćenje
https://doi.org/10.51650/ezrvs.19.3-4.5
The Non-Appointment of the Constitutional Court Judges in the Contemporary Croatian Political Practice
Ante Elez
orcid.org/0009-0007-7758-172X
; Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb, Hrvatska
Sažetak
The functional and timely conduct of the procedure for appointing judges of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia has become an increasingly frequent and significant burden on Croatian constitutional reality, emerging as yet another (side) product of the continuous implementation of non-consensual, one-party (parliamentary) politics. Thus, the procedure in question has been subjected to mere political bargaining, disregarding generally recognised practices inherent in contemporary democracies, while the successful completion of the process appears to depend entirely on the prevailing political climate. The culmination of this issue occurred at the end of 2024, when Croatia experienced a fourteen-hour-long constitutional crisis caused by the temporary failure to form a new composition of the Constitutional Court. The crisis was further marked by a specific Report of the Constitutional Court, through which the outgoing judges unilaterally extended their own mandates by adopting a questionable interpretation of Article 126 of the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia. This paper first examines the positive constitutional practice of the Croatian Parliament with regard to the appointment of Constitutional Court judges, identifying and describing procedural unconstitutionality in that respect. Then—in the main part of the paper—it critically and doctrinally contests the constitutional validity and justification of the Constitutional Court’s Report from late 2024, seeking to explain the extent of the danger amplified by such constitutional conduct. Among other things, the paper emphasises objections concerning the (legal) non-existence of the Report in question, its lack of argumentative grounding and logical coherence, and, ultimately, its failure to entirely prevent the occurrence of the constitutional crisis.
In conclusion, the author stresses the necessity of political consolidation in carrying out such a constitutional procedure, as well as the Constitutional Court’s obligation to safeguard the integrity and vitality of the constitutional order through legally legitimate and lawful conduct.
Ključne riječi
constituional crises; the judicial appointment; one-sided mandate prolongation; the constitutional interpretation; the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia.
Hrčak ID:
341521
URI
Datum izdavanja:
23.12.2025.
Posjeta: 691 *