Konstitucinio Teismo galios: riboti negalima plėsti

LTLietuvos Respublikos teisės sistemos pamato - 1992 m. Konstitucijos, apsaugos ir viršenybes užtikrinimo įgaliojimai patikėti Konstituciniam Teismui, tad šios institucijos galių tematika niekada nepraras aktualumo. Tai patvirtina viešojoje erdvėje vis nuskambantys siūlymai riboti Konstitucinio Teismo įgaliojimus. Pavyzdžiui, visai neseniai vienas politikas teigė, kad Konstitucinio Teismo aktai ir juose formuojama oficialioji konstitucinė doktrina Seimui neturi būti privalomi. Straipsnio pavadinimu kviečiama diskusijai Konstitucinio Teismo įgaliojimų klausimu: plėsti juos ar riboti? Nesiekiant įteigti, kurioje vietoje pavadinime reikėtų dėti kablelį, straipsnyje užduodami klausimai: ar Konstitucinio Teismo įgaliojimai visuomenėje iš tiesų yra suprantami teisingai ir, ar jie, palyginti su kitų šalių teismais, yra tokie platūs? Šiais klausimais Lietuvoje paskleista daugybė mitų. Pagrindiniai iš jų aptariami šiame straipsnyje [p. 7].

ENThe subject of this article is the scope of the authority of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania. The Constitutional Court is occasionally criticised for allegedly having extraordinarily broad authority. In this article, such claims are refuted by elaborating the Constitutional Court's powers in more detail in comparison to the powers of other European constitutional courts. The myth that the Constitutional Court does not possess the authority to interpret the Constitution is disproved as based on a narrow verbatim approach to the Constitution, which does not hold up when taken into account with the overall constitutional legal regulation and the purpose of constitutional justice itself. The Constitutional Court's methodology of constitutional interpretation is based on the holistic view of the Constitution, which sometimes is metaphorically named as the spirit of the Constitution, thus attracting criticism for allegedly being used as a tool of arbitrary expansion of the Court \s authority. However, the Constitution expressly declares that it is an integral act, meaning that all of the constitutional norms and principles are linked by systemic ties that bind the Constitution into a single coherent whole. Historic and comparative evidence confirms that the said approach is neither a novelty, nor an idiosyncrasy in the context of the development of constitutional justice.Political criticism sometimes manifests itself in legislative initiatives that seek to hamper the effectiveness of the Constitutional Court's performance. Also, during the recent economic crisis, certain opinions were aired on limiting the Constitutional Court's competence to evaluate the constitutionality of legal acts that convey economic and fiscal policy. Nevertheless, the Constitutional Conn is consistent in its case law, which expressly states that it does not evaluate the soundness, necessity, or expediency of economic policy, except in extreme situations when certain economic policy is manifestly inconsistent with the Constitution.