TFL Vsebine / Revija Pravnik

7

Prispevek obravnava vprašanje, ali obstaja pravna obveznost Ustavnega sodišča, da sledi svojim odločitvam. Avtor najprej predstavi dve pojmovanji vloge preteklih sodnih odločitev v razlogovanju sodišč. V skladu s prvim pogledom je sodišče na preteklo odločitev vezano tako, da lahko od nje odstopi le, če so za to podani razlogi posebne vrste ali teže, ne pa vselej, kadar meni, da je odločitev napačna. Drugo pojmovanje pa sodišču nudi več manevrskega prostora: svoje pravno stališče lahko spremeni, če za to ponudi razumno utemeljitev. V preostanku prispevka avtor ovrednoti tri argumente v prid tezi, da prvi pogled najbolje opisuje držo, ki bi jo Ustavno sodišče pravno gledano moralo zavzeti do svojih odločitev.

The aim of this article is to explore whether the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Slovenia is legally bound by its own decisions. First, the author distinguishes two alternative conceptions of how past judicial decisions may be relevant to the decision-making of a later court. On the first account, the court is bound by a previous decision in the sense of only being permitted to depart from it when reasons of special kind or weight obtain, not whenever it deems that decision wrong. On the second view, the court has more latitude: it may always change its mind on a legal issue as long as it provides a reasonable justification for doing so. In the remainder of the article, the author evaluates three arguments in favour of the claim that the first view most faithfully describes the attitude which the Constitutional Court legally ought to adopt towards its own decisions.

Is the Constitutional Court Bound by Its Own Decisions?