CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW OF CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

Abstract

This paper deals with the constitutional review of constitutional amendments. The examination of comparative law regarding the constitutional review of amendments to the constitutions shows that such a review is no longer merely a theoretical hypothesis, but rather an existing practice in many constitutional systems. Some constitutions provide a posteriori formal constitutional review, while the others establish a priori substantive review. Moreover, comparative experiences show that the constitutional courts, in absence of constitutional provisions, interpreted their jurisdiction widely in order to allow such control. The horizontal spreading of constitutional review of constitutional amendments was followed in some states by its vertical substantive weakening, both in terms of ground, and in terms of the standard of such review.