Judicial Review of the Constitutional Court Over the Formulation of Legislations
Dr. Marwan Al-Modares
Assit. Prof. – Public Law Faculty of Law – University of Bahrain
Abstract:
Generally, any legislation cannot achieve certainty and stability of the transactions, where individuals are unable to abide upon unless this legislation was clear and consistent with other existing legislations. Therefore, the legal formulation is considered as crucial criterion that determines the adequacy of legislation. This research aims to answer the question of whether it is possible to challenge the unconstitutionality of the law due to its imprecise or unclear formulation, and what is the legal basis of the Constitution Court to establish jurisdiction over the legal formulation. This research concluded that the lack of clarity or ambiguous formula of legislations violates the Constitution, since it does not meet the Constitutional Principle pertained to legal certainty and stability in transactions, and does not generate trust to the individuals, and leads to wide judicial discretionary power that would threaten rights and freedoms. Hence, the Constitutional Courts started to establish jurisdictions over the lack of clarity in the legal formulation to achieve legal certainty and to avoid threatening rights and freedoms.