International experience in the implementation of acts of constitutional control bodies

Comparative jurisprudence is not always and primarily in search of better options or always only a preliminary stage of reform, but is increasingly understood as an important method of better understanding one’s own law in the mirror of other legal systems in its strengths and weaknesses. In this regard, the comparison of constitutional jurisdictions around the world aims to make the normal building block of the architecture of existing constitutions understandable in its diversity and internal variations. Constitutional jurisdiction (as a function or as an independent institution) has become established. It is for this reason, however, that we cannot expect uniformity in the scope and weight of their competence, in the intensity of their control and in their role in relation to the higher state bodies in general. Today, more than ever, it is clear that the legal order is broadly covered by European Union law. This is not only due to the principles of direct effect and primacy of this law, which apply in the context of a static division of competences between the European Union and its Member States. How this actually works demonstrates that the evolution and protection of the effectiveness of the EU legal order is often not only a source of numerous obligations for national authorities of the Member States, but also a motivation for national authorities of the Member States to make various voluntary adjustments to national legislation, even in areas that, in principle, do not fall within the scope of application of EU law. The experience of participation in the process of European unification often leads to a revision of certain perceptions or certain fundamental elements of the respective national legal systems. Indeed, either by its direct effect and primacy, or by its so-called pull effect, European Union law, of which the Charter of Fundamental Rights is now the main norm, and through it the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, unduly determines the interpretation and application of the law also in respect of issues that are normally analysed on the basis of the specifics of the national legal order.