Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
AbstractCivil law systems that have established constitutional courts alongside their systems of regular courts have traditionally had difficulty defining the precise jurisdictional dividing line between them. This has been a problem in Russia since the time of the establishment of Russia's first Constitutional Court in 1991 and it continues today with Russia's current Constitutional Court, established by Russia's 1993 Constitution. The clash between the Russian Constitutional Court and regular courts has intensified since 1998, when the Constitutional Court began a campaign to expand its jurisdiction through broad interpretations of its powers under the Constitution. That campaign continues to the present day, with decisions as recent as this year claiming even broader jurisdiction than before. Many of the Constitution Court's decisions can be criticized as poorly reasoned and contrary to the letter and history of the jurisdictional grants set out in the Constitution. This article examines those decisions and the reactions of the regular court systems to them.
American Journal of Comparative Law – Oxford University Press
Published: Jul 1, 2007
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.