Dr. Khaled Fayez Al-Huwaila
Assistant Professor of Public Law KILAW

Abstract:

Modern constitutions are keen to stipulate general rights and freedoms, and these rights and freedoms, some of which cannot be regulated by the ordinary legislator while others may be regulated provided that this does not result in confiscating of the origin of the right or abridging it. Practical experiences regarding those rights and freedoms have proven that it is not sufficient to provide for them in constitutions, but judicial protection must be provided. Hence, the importance of conducting research on the extent of the role of the constitutional judiciary and the supreme courts regarding the protection of those public rights and freedoms guaranteed by the constitution, whenever they are violated by the legislative and executive powers.
This study examines the most important modern trends of the constitutional judiciary and the supreme courts in Egypt and Kuwait, comparatively, towards political rights and intellectual freedoms. The position of the constitutional judiciary and the supreme courts towards the right to strike is presented, stating the position of the Egyptian State Council towards that right as it played an important role on the scope of that right and balanced it with the principle of running public facilities regularly and steadily, in addition to the right to stand for election and vote as one of the most important political rights. Also, the position of the constitutional judiciary and the supreme courts in Egypt and Kuwait is presented in regards to the right to meetings, gatherings, demonstrations and freedom of the press as one of the most important intellectual rights and freedoms while clarifying the role of the judiciary to exercise the necessary conditions on the one hand and the protection of public order and procedures on the other hand.

Keywords: constitutional court, right to strike, right to stand for election, right to vote, right to assembly, freedom of the press.

Read Full PDF Text (Arabic)