Kemal Gözler, Judicial Review of Constitutional Amendments: A Comparative Study, Bursa, Ekin Press, 2008, XII+ 126 p.


Full Text [PDF] [HTML]


(Bigger Front Cover)
(Back Cover)

This monograph is an attempt to answer the following questions: Can constitutional courts review the constitutionality of constitutional amendments? If yes, to what extent? It is endeavored, in a comparative perspective, to answer these questions by examining the constitutions of several countries and the case law of the Austrian, German, Hungarian, Romanian, Slovenian and Turkish Constitutional Courts, French Constitutional Council, Indian, Irish, and the United States Supreme Courts.


Full Text [PDF] [HTML]



SUMMARY OF CONTENTS

Introduction

Chapter 1: Do Constitutional Courts Have Competence to Review Constitutional Amendments?

I. If There Is a Constitutional Provision Concerning the Question of Competence

A. The Constitutions Empowering the Constitutional Courts to Review Constitutional Amendments

B. The Constitution Expressly Prohibiting the Review of the Constitutional Amendments

II. If There is No Constitutional Provision Concerning the Question of Competence

A. The Competence of Courts to Rule on Constitutional Amendments under the American Model of Judicial Review

B. The Competence of Constitutional Courts to Rule on Constitutional Amendments under the European Model of Judicial Review

C. Can Constitutional Amendments Be Deemed to Be “Law” and Consequently Be Reviewed by Constitutional Courts?

Chapter 2: Can Constitutional Courts Review the Formal and Procedural Regularity of Constitutional Amendments?

I. The United States Supreme Court

II. Austrian Constitutional Court

III. Turkish Constitutional Court

Chapter 3: Can Constitutional Courts Review the Substance of Constitutional Amendments?

I. If There Are Substantive Limits in the Constitution, the Judicial Review of the Substance of Constitutional Amendments is Possible

A. German Constitutional Court

B. Turkish Constitutional Court

II. If There Are No Substantive Limits in the Constitution, the Judicial Review of the Substance of Constitutional Amendments is not Possible

A. The Arguments in Favor of the Existence of Implicit Substantive Limits

B. Case-Law of Constitutional Courts Rejecting the Existence of Implicit Substantive Limits

C. Case-Law of Constitutional Courts Accepting the Existence of Implicit Substantive Limits

Conclusion

Bibliography

Index


CITATION REPORTS FOR THIS BOOK

General Citation Report (Court decisions, books, articles and other materials that cite this book) [HTML] [PDF]

Citation Report via Web of Science [PDF]

Citation Report via HeinOnline [PDF]

Citation Report via Google Scholar [PDF] [HTML]



PUBLICATION INFORMATION
Binding: Paperback
Pages: XII+126
Dimensions: 13,5 cm x 19,5 cm
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN-13: 978-0044-141-73-4
Language: English
LoC Class Number: K.3175.G69 2008
Dewey Class Number: 347.012 or 342.712
Publisher: Ekin Basim Yayin
Şehreküstü Mahallesi, Cumhuriyet Caddesi,
Durak Sokak No 2, Osmangazi - BURSA,
Tel: (0224) 223 04 37; 220 16 72; 223 04 37; Fax: (0224) 223 04 37;
E-Mail: info@ekinyayinevi.com
Web: www.ekinyayinevi.com

To purchase a hard copy of this book:
amazon.de
amazon.com.tr
hukukmarket.com

© Kemal Gözler, 2008. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be republished or redistributed, by any means, electronic or mechanical, without the prior written permission of the author. However you may print a single copy of this book solely for your personal, non-commercial use. You may also download and save this book on your hard drive to view it offline, for your own use.


Editor: Kemal Gözler
E-Mail:
twitter.com/k_gozler
Home: www.anayasa.gen.tr
This Page: http://www.anayasa.gen.tr/jrca.htm
Creation Date: Dec. 20, 2008
Last Updated: February 11, 2019