Appointment of Constitutional Judges in a Comparative Perspective - With a Proposal for a New Model for Hungary

Acta Juridica Hungarica, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 5-23 (2013)

19 Pages Posted: 8 Mar 2013

Date Written: October 1, 2012

Abstract

This paper discusses the different models of appointment applied for constitutional judges in Europe, taking into consideration also the appointment procedure of the two European regional courts. It offers an account and a comparative analysis of the three appointment models: the split, the collaborative and the parliamentary model, discussing their practical application and shortcomings, with reference to European constitutional courts. In particular, the paper deals with the question of how to avoid standstills in the different appointment procedures and with the publicity of these procedures. The author concludes with a proposal for the Hungarian Constitutional Court, arguing that the split model is the one that ensures better that the composition of the Court expresses a balance between the branches of government.

Keywords: judicial appointments, comparative law, constitutional courts

JEL Classification: K19

Suggested Citation

Kelemen, Katalin, Appointment of Constitutional Judges in a Comparative Perspective - With a Proposal for a New Model for Hungary (October 1, 2012). Acta Juridica Hungarica, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 5-23 (2013). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2229184

Katalin Kelemen (Contact Author)

Örebro University ( email )

Fakultetsgatan 1
SE-701 82
Örebro, 70210
Sweden

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
171
Abstract Views
776
rank
177,996
PlumX Metrics