Federal Constitutional Court of Delkora
| Federal Constitutional Court of Delkora | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Established | 1833 |
| Location | Norenstal, Delkora |
| Composition method | Nomination by the federal Cabinet subject to approval from the Delkoran Federal Parliament |
| Authorized by | Constitution of Delkora |
| Judge term length | Mandatory retirement at 70 years of age |
| Number of positions | 12 |
| Website | www |
| President | |
| Currently | Arya Raelenthur |
| Since | 24 April 2007 |
The Federal Constitutional Court of Delkora (Delkoran: Føderal Forfatningsdomstol) is the highest court in the Kingdom of Delkora, responsible for interpreting the Delkoran Constitution and ensuring that laws are in compliance with it.
Composition
The Court is composed of 12 justices who are nominated by the Cabinet and require the approval of a 2/3 majority of both chambers of the Federal Parliament. To be eligible to sit on the Court, a candidate must be at least 30 years old, have at least 10 years of legal experience, possess a law degree from an accredited university, and be currently licensed to practice law. Once sworn in, justices can only be removed from office for criminal convictions, professional misconduct, and other narrowly defined ethical violations. An effort to remove a justice requires a 2/3 majority of both chambers of Parliament.
Justices are prohibited from engaging in public displays of partisanship and may not be affiliated with any political party or partisan organization.
Organization and function
The Federal Constitutional Court is presided over by a president and vice president elected from its ranks. The president presides over the Court's deliberations and oversees aspects of its administration such as budgetary and personnel matters, but otherwise possesses no special powers. In the event of the president being incapacitated or recusing themselves from a case, the vice president performs these duties.
The Court sets its own caseload; at least 4 justices must vote to hear a case in order for it to proceed. In practice, most cases brought before the court for consideration are not heard, most often because justices determine that the constitutional issue at question has already been resolved or that the plaintiff does not have a judiciable case.
It meets for three sessions throughout the year, the first being from 2 January to 2 March, the second being from 2 May to 2 July, and the third going from 2 September to 2 November. Under the Delkoran Constitution, the monarch, on the advice of the Cabinet, can call the Court into special session to expedite consideration of a particularly important case brought before it during a recess.
Role
The Court has the power to exercise judicial review of all primary and secondary legislation at the federal, state, and local levels in Delkora to ensure its compliance with the Delkoran Constitution. Pursuant to this power, it can declare any act of government unconstitutional. Once declared unconstitutional, a regulation or piece of legislation immediately ceases to have legal force.
The Court's scope is limited to federal constitutional questions; questions of federal ordinary and administrative law are handled by separate courts. Similarly, questions involving state law and constitutional matters are under the jurisdiction of a separate system of state courts.
Matters subject to the Court's jurisdiction fall into three categories:
- Violations of constitutional rights: The most common cases brought before the Court are accusations on the part of individuals or organizations that an act of government has violated a person's constitutional rights.
- Vertical division of power: Cases involving disputes over whether a particular area is a federal or state competency.
- Horizontal division of power: Cases involving disputes over which body of the federal government has authority in a particular area.
- Abstract review: Any person can request that the Court provide an advisory opinion on a particular matter to ascertain its constitutionality. The most common cases falling under this category are requests from the government or opposition to rule on the constitutionality of proposed legislation or regulations.
Notable rulings
- Decision no. 43 of 1886: Noble titles granted through letters patent issued by the states cannot be revoked by the federal government.
- Decision no. 361 of 1935: The federal government can dismiss a state government that has willfully abrogated its duty to uphold federal law when doing so is necessary to preserve social order.
- Decision no. 257 of 1940: It is not unconstitutional for a political party to expel members from electoral lists for voting against the party line, provided the expulsions are done in accordance with the party's internal rules and applicable law.
- Decision no. 129 of 1953: The government cannot ban an organization solely on the basis of speech calling for a violent revolution, but must instead demonstrate that the group is actually engaged in, or conspiring to engage in, violence.
- Decision no. 384 of 1977: Speech in a government context invoking a religious concept is unconstitutional unless, through customary usage, the speech has lost its original religious connotation.
- Decision no. 106 of 1984: The government cannot enjoin a newspaper from publishing classified information.
- Decision no. 269 of 2010: Laws banning hate speech do not violate the right to freedom of expression.
- Decision no. 174 of 2013: Roving wiretaps are an unconstitutional violation of the right to privacy.