Safeguarding the Democracy from Inside: The Story of the Constitutional Court and the Parliament in Czechia

Constitutional courts undoubtedly belong among core players in the governance of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Not only did the constitutional courts represent a symbolic break with a past, for post-communist reformers, deeply committed to idea of the rule of law, the mere establishment of constitutional courts defined a disengagement from the previous regime, but they were also generally considered as better equipped to address the missing societal understanding and consensus on the nature of rights. In the political turmoil and rush of (often chaotic) 1989 institutional reconstructions, it was often the constitutional courts who were left to fill in the holes in imperfect transitional constitutions, and articulate values underlying the new democratic regime. The Czech Constitutional Court (CCC) is often praised as a particularly strong actor of the domestic political system, earning therefore one of the prominent positions within the Central and Eastern European system of constitutional courts. Moreover, within the group of Central European countries, the CCC remains to be the only constitutional court so far not targeted by any constrains or attempts to cut its competences. Nevertheless, until now, there was only very little data on its relationship with the Parliament. Drawing on an innovative research presented by the JUDICON project, this paper examines the role of the CCC in the legislative process and its relationship towards the Czech Parliament through the analysis of its constitutional review case law addressing legislative changes. How much does the CCC constrain the Czech legislator? Is the CCC sensitive towards certain topics, or political composition of the Parliament? Has the approach changed throughout the time (in other words, did the CCC’s profile changed with justices nominated under different Presidents?) In order to answer these questions, the paper combines both quantitative analysis, building on a dataset produces by the JUDICON project, and qualitative assessment of the most important cases.