How possible is it for one challenge implementation of a bill in parliament before it becomes law? Can the same be taken to court. All views from different jurisdictions are welcome.
Realmente la discusión previa de proyectos de ley constribuye a perfeccionar la norma antes de ser aprobadad es una forma de participación en la construcción jurídica de un ordenamiento
Until the law is adopted, there is no subject for judicial appeal. The intention of the legislator cannot be challenged in court.
It requires an effective opposition to hold the government proposing the Bill to account. Of course direct action by the public in opposition to a Bill may also cause a re-think by a government, but this can be problematic for numerous reasons.
Great question.
Very best wishes, James.
The responsibility of the government "in its purest form" cannot be discussed here. The legislative process presupposes freedom of opinion and judgment. The government can propose absolutely any bill. And if there is no unconstitutional behavior in the very attempt to present such a draft law,then there is no constitutional responsibility.
If you are asking about different jurisdiction, it is not possible under Slovakian Constitution, only after the bill is adopted as a law. I believe that there may be a state that is allowing such procedure. In our case such procedure exists only in conection to international treaties - constitutional court may examine if the treaty is coherent with constitution before the treaty is ratified.
In continuation of the answer, Lukasz Marechek. A preliminary (before the President signs it) constitutional assessment by the Constitutional Court of not only an international treaty, but also a law is possible. This procedure is provided for in the Constitution of Russia and in the Constitution of Belarus. But this is not about responsibility, of course. Although, according to the Constitution of Belarus, the President has the right to dissolve the parliament if it repeatedly passes unconstitutional laws.
El Estado como garante de los derechos que posee el individuo, es creador de la norma jurídica y debe legitimar las instituciones de legalidad y seguridad jurídica como mecanismos de regulación social y reservorio axiológico del Derecho. Su sistematización permite que actúen como principios deontológicos carentes de antinomias, donde las obligaciones no se conviertan en lagunas que nieguen el derecho subjetivo que le asiste al titular
En este sentido, la Constitución aprobada el 10 de abril de 2019, devenida de una amplia participación popular delineó en cada artículo la defensa de un texto atemperado a las condiciones actuales de la sociedad, a partir de la actualización del modelo económico social, la tradición constitucional y la influencia de los procesos constitucionalista desarrollados en América Latina.
In Latvia it's not possible to challenge the constitutionality of the law before it has became a law (final). It is possible to submit a claim to Const.court regarding the signed but not finaly ratified by the parliament international agreement. This is used as a tool to solve the doubts about compliance with national constitution.
In the Constitution of Poland preliminary (before the President signs it) constitutional assessment by the Constitutional Court of not only an international treaty, but also a law is possible. Only the President has such competence for preventive control.
Other entities entitled to submit an application to the Constitutional Tribunal may do so after the act (international agreement) enters into force.
Well, dear Abdallah, in Brazil, for example, a writ of mandamus is admitted for a bill that violates any procedural provision or that did not observe the procedures provided for in the Constitution and in the internal rules of the Parliamentary House (Chamber or Senate). Excuse me. My "English" is very weak.
No the matter cannot be taken to the court because the bill is not the law .
In jordan this possible by the member of the parliaeint not by individuals.
but any party to the lawsuit may argue that the law is not in conformity withe the constitution.if the court finds that the plea has merit it send it to the cassition court and after that to constitutional court.
افتكر الخطوات التي تتبع لإجازة القانون خطوات متعددة تبدأ منذ لحظة اقتراح القانون مرورا بعدد من القراءات للقانون حتي يصل مرحلة المصادقة عليه ومن ثم يصبح قانون نافذ واذا أفرز التطبيق أي خلل يتصادم بموجبه القانون مع الدستور يمكن الطعن في القانون بعدم الدستورية.
The question of "Legislative process and Constitutional law" I have reviewed in an article entitled THE PROCESS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF LAW POST SHIFT OF LEGISLATIVE POWERS FROM PRESIDENT TO DPR. This article reviews specifically in the context of Indonesia (UUD Negara RI 1945; Indonesian Constitution). The article file has been loaded.
By the principle of separation of powers it is not possible for the law to be challenged in the courts, however in our country the law recently sanctioned by the president and which is integrated into the legal order is reviewed by the Constitutional Court who can, by the jurisdiction granted by magna Carta, in order to preserve the integrity and supremacy of the Political Charter , resolve their constitutionality when these, presidential objections, are based on reasons of unconstitutionality and Congress insists on maintaining the respective rules. Consequently, it is not for the President of the Republic, when exercising the power to object, to determine the final content of the rules of a bill approved by Congress, much less to include in the same provisions as it deems more appropriate than those approved by the legislature. It is clear that the purpose of the objections is not to allow the Chair to make decisions regarding the content of the bill, but only to raise the arguments that lead him to dissent from the approved normative content.
The legislative process in a nutshell: First, a Representative sponsors a bill. The bill is then assigned to a committee for study. If released by the committee, the bill is put on a calendar to be voted on, debated or amended. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval.
constitutional law is that part of national law which governs the systems of public administration and the relationship between the individual and the state. Constitutional law presupposes the existence of the state
Parliament exercises legislative power, votes laws,
The constitution defines the jurisdiction of the field of law (Article 71), whereby the head of government and members of Parliament share the legislative initiative, that is, the head of government and members of Parliament alike have the right to propose laws, and in the event of a dispute between them, the Constitutional Court is resorted to (Article 79).
Governmental draft laws shall be deposited with priority in the House of Representatives office (Article 78), except for those related to territorial communities, regional development and social issues, which are in turn placed in priority with the House of Councilors office. At least one day a month is devoted to studying proposals for laws, including those submitted by the opposition.
Draft laws and proposals of laws (Article 80, 81, ... 86) are referred to the permanent committees concerned with the Council for discussion and approval. After that, it is studied and voted upon in plenary sessions to be referred to the House of Councilors. In the event that there is a difference between the wording approved by each House, the House of Representatives has the final vote on the text in which it was broadcast.
Abdallah Sekibembe
Some constitutions provide ordinance making power to the head of the state. Under this system usually the ordinance stays enforceable till the next parliament approves or diapproves it. Within this time it has enforeability. When the parliament approves it, it becomes law. If you consider it a bill, then answer to your question is- yes it is varily enforceable and you can actually go to the court on it.. But I think there is a little scope to consider an ordinance as a bill because both can be disinguished very easily.
the constitutional court of the russian federation, at the request of the president, may check a draft law for compliance with the constitution before it is adopted by parliament. if the draft law is found to be unconstitutional, then the legislative process with respect to such a draft law is terminated.
(chapter XVII Federal Constitutional Law of 21.07.1994 N 1-FKZ (revised on 09.11.2020) "On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation")
In my opinion, the bill or draft law (RUU) cannot yet be brought to the judiciary for judicial review (if in Indonesia, the law is in judicial revies in the Constitutional Court). A law (UU), begins with the existence of a bill. then discussed to get joint approval in the legislative body (If it is Indonesia, the House of Representatives and the President, but the President is always represented by the Minister). Bills that have been approved to become laws will be ratified by the President. However, it should be remembered, that the law that has been passed by the President does not yet have the power to apply (salability) and also does not have binding power (binding power). The new law has salable power and has binding power after it is promulgated in a state gazette. The basis for the need for laws to be promulgated in the State Gazette starts from the principle: that everyone is considered to know the Law after it has been promulgated (een ieder wordt geacht de wet te kennen) in the state sheet. This is also related to the principle: ignorantia iuris neminen excusat (ignorance of the law execuses no man). Thus, new laws can be submitted to the Mahmakah of the Constitution after the Law is promulgated in the State Gazette. So, the enactment of a law in the State Gazette is a condition that the law already has salable power and at the same time has binding power. Hopefully my opinion can be useful.
I also need to add, that the phrase or diction "has force to apply" (power of action) must be distinguished from the phrase or diction "has binding strength" (binding power). In Indonesia, most laws include one article at the end, namely: "This law is declared to come into effect when it is promulgated". Then, it is possible for a law to include one article at the end, such as: "This law is declared to take effect 60 days after it was promulgated (in a state sheet). For example, a law was enacted on January 1, 2020. This just shows the date the law began "has the power to take effect" (power of action). Furthermore, the binding power (binding power) of the Law only came into effect on March 1, 2020 (60 days after it was promulgated in the State Gazette). In practice in Indonesia, parties who wish to propose a law for judicial review at the Constitutional Court, usually it will wait when the time for the Law to be promulgated in the State Gazette. However, the Indonesian Constitution also stipulates that if the President does not pass the law within 30 days after it is approved in the legislative body, the Law will still be promulgated. in the state gazette, so the law will remain valid and binding.
In Ireland, a Bill (or a section of a Bill) passed by the Oireachtas (Parliament) can be referred to the Irish Supreme Court by the President before being signed in to law. The Supreme Court will give its opinion as to whether or not it is constitutional. If it is unconstitutional, it cannot be signed into law. If it is constitutional, it will be signed into law by the President. In limited cases, it can be possible for a Bill that has passed the Oireachtas to be subject to a referendum before becoming law, but this has never occurred.
In my opinion bill cannot be challenged in the court as it does not have any legal validity. In Nepal, the draft bill requires approval from the president to come into existence and parliament plays major role in this process. The law-making process follows several steps: submission of the concept note by the relevant Ministry which should be consider inter alia, the legislative scheme, the general welfare of the people, equal treatment principle, public participation along with stakeholders and expert consultation (Ministry of law and justice has major role in the drafting); draft submitted to the parliament; thematic discussion and revisions in the parliament; voting in parliament and submission to the president for approval. While drafting and revision at the parliament, all concerned authorities must consider provisions of constitution, international treaties, Supreme Court orders and government plans and policies.
But in absence of parliament, if president approves ordinance in the recommendation of minister of council; and the ordinance lacks consideration to the constitutional provisions, international laws, existing policies and might have significant implications in several areas, can be challenged for judicial review.
In South African law it is possible for the President to, after referring a bill back to the National Assembly to deal with certain reservations he has, refer the bill to the Constitutional Court to assess its constitutionality (see sections 84 (2) (c) and 79 (4) (b) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The Constitution further has corresponding provisions dealing with same in the context of provincial bills).
All legislative process, in a given Nation, MUST FOLLOW AND BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRINCIPLES AND GUIDELINES CONSECRATED IN ITS CONSTITUTION!
I do not know the legislation of Uganda, but in the European Union and in the USA - among other nations - if such a "Bill" has overtones of unconstitutionality, it would not even be admitted for processing or debate, after the previous report of the Lawyers of the Parliament in question who would warn, reasoned and reasonable, of the UNCONSTITUTIONALITY OF SUCH PROJECT
In South Africa all new bills or amendments are open for public comment for a period before it is submitted to parliament. Periods vary.
I agree with Francisco Javier Gala's opinion, that the process of drafting a bill into law is different in each country. It depends on the constitution of each country. Then, related to the testing of laws/drafts of laws, there are countries that use the "judicial pre-review" model. This means that the draft law can be tested in court or at the constitutional court before it becomes law. From Svetlana Popova's explanation, it is read that the Russian constitution adheres to the "judicial pre-review" model. Furthermore, there are also countries that use the "judicial review" model. This means that the court or constitutional court can only examine the law. Meanwhile, the draft law cannot be tested in court or at the constitutional court. The Indonesian constitution chooses this model (judicial review). The reason is simple, because the draft law has not officially become law, nor does it have any valid and binding force.
In my opinion, both the “judicial pre-review” model and the “judicial review” model each have their advantages and disadvantages (plus and minus). Apart from the advantages and disadvantages of the two models, the "judicial pre-review" model and the "judicial review" model, both are part of the system of checks and balances between the legislative and other branches of power (judicative and executive).
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Political Science