The Impact of Constitutions Succession upon the Authority of the Constitutional Judicial Rules

Abstract

Constitutions can be temporary for a specific period, ending at the end of that period, as specified in the interim constitution itself. It can also be permanent, which means that they do not specify an expiration date, although the ability to be amended according to procedures stipulated in the constitution itself. This is similar to what happens with rigid constitutions, which enjoy a degree of relative stability.

The differences between new and ancient constitutions in principles and foundations, and the differences in explaining the constitutional provisions, may affect the validity of res judicata. The succession of constitutions can also affect the judiciary, especially if the new constitutions lead to changes in the judicial structure or litigation procedures through inconsistencies, which in turn affect the validity of res judicata.

This research aims to demonstrate the validity of rulings issued by the constitutional judiciary, especially since the Supreme Constitutional Court is constantly confronted with a succession of constitutions. This poses a dilemma if constitutions are issued later than these rulings. Does this ruling have constitutional validity or is it nullified by unconstitutionality? This research is devoted to studying the difficulties raised by succession regarding the control of the constitutionality of laws in terms of explaining the effect of changing legal circumstances on the validity of these decisions, by amending the constitutional texts and changing the ruling from constitutional to unconstitutional.