IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlawss/v12y2023i1p11-d1039288.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Separate Opinions of a Justice of a Constitutional Court: A Case of Lithuania

Author

Listed:
  • Dovilė Pūraitė-Andrikienė

    (Law Institute of the Lithuanian Centre for Social Sciences, LT 01109 Vilnius, Lithuania)

Abstract

Although allowing justices of constitutional courts to publish their separate opinions has become a clear trend in Europe, until an amendment to the Law on the Constitutional Court in 2008, the justices of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania did not have this possibility. However, after the introduction of this institution in Lithuania, criticism was voiced by the public regarding its legal regulation. Therefore, this article examines the legal regulation governing the institution of a separate opinion of a justice of the Constitutional Court, as well as the use of this institution in Lithuania. The article seeks to reveal the shortcomings of this regulation, as well as to provide proposals for its improvement. The issues in question are examined in the context of the legal framework governing the institution of a separate opinion in other European Union countries (with a particular focus on Eastern and Central European countries). In order to provide a basis for this research, the article also examines the institution of a separate opinion in the context of the principle of the secrecy of the deliberation room and the secrecy of voting results in the decision-making process of constitutional justice institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Dovilė Pūraitė-Andrikienė, 2023. "The Separate Opinions of a Justice of a Constitutional Court: A Case of Lithuania," Laws, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-19, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:12:y:2023:i:1:p:11-:d:1039288
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/12/1/11/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/12/1/11/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:12:y:2023:i:1:p:11-:d:1039288. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.