Many people—both specialists and non-specialists—believe and frequently assert that the judgments of constitutional courts are political judgments in the strict sense of the term. Some even assume that the constitutional court itself is a political body forming part of the state’s political entities.
In reality, and as a matter of legal accuracy, this perception is incorrect.
A constitutional court is a purely judicial body. Its judgments are issued by judges, or by individuals occupying a judicial position (particularly in jurisdictions where the composition of the court is mixed, or in systems that adopt the constitutional council model). Undoubtedly, however, such judgments may have significant political impact on the state and on society—especially where the state is experiencing political disagreement marked by sharply divergent views, or conflicts between political authorities involving underlying or undisclosed objectives.
Such judgments may lead to tangible effects on the administrative system of the state, or what some political actors describe as societal divisions. They may also result in amendments to the structure of the state, its authorities, and its public or private institutions. In cases where this political impact becomes extensive, it may necessitate intervention by the state’s leadership to address or manage such consequences in a manner that preserves the stability of the state and its public order.
Nevertheless, it is beyond doubt that constitutional courts are essential institutions whose existence and function are indispensable in constitutional states governed by binding constitutions that define their system and existence—regardless of the form of their establishment, the manner of constituting their bodies, or the designation applied to them, whether “constitutional courts” or “constitutional councils.” This is so irrespective of whether their jurisdiction involves prior or subsequent review of the constitutionality of laws and other legislative instruments.
This principle has been affirmed by the Constitutional Court itself in numerous judgments, wherein it has emphasized that it is the guarantor of the constitutional, legal, and political order of the state; the guardian of the constitution; and a supporter of the state’s system and entity—regardless of the extent of the political impact of its judgments.
Disclaimer
This article was originally written in Arabic.
The English version provided above is a translation intended for informational purposes only. Due to the inherent differences between the Arabic and English languages, certain legal expressions, nuances, or contextual meanings may not be fully captured or may vary in interpretation. In the event of any discrepancy, the original Arabic text shall prevail.