Object of Proof in the Constitutional Trial of European Countries (Celʼzen Model)

Abstract

The article is devoted to the relevant, but non-investigative, issues related to the definition of the philosophical, legal, and methodological foundations of the formation of the evidence base in the process of constitutional proceeding. The author pays particular attention to the constitutional norms of foreign countries, which defines the subject of evidence in constitutional justice, which, like the domestic one, is constructed in accordance with the continental model of the Celʼzen. According to the results of the research, the author concludes that evidence in a constitutional proceeding organized by the Continental (Celʼzens) model has a certain specificity, which is as follows: 1. The European (Celʼzens) model of constitutional justice envisages the creation of special constitutional courts, which, as a rule, are not part of the judicial system and consider issues outside the scope of their competence outside the context of socio-political phenomena and the circumstances that prompted the appeal to them. 2. The powers and basic principles of the functioning of the constitutional justice body of such a model, in most cases, are determined by the norms of the constitutions and specified by the relevant laws. 3. The subject of proof in constitutional proceedings in the Continental (Celʼzens) model, as a rule, follows from the powers determined by the constitution and coincides with the subject of consideration of a particular case in accordance with the procedure established by law. Its specificity lies in the fact that the constitutional trial of such a model is limited to issues of law, that is, the clarification of the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of objects of constitutional judicial control, as well as the definition of the essence and content of objects of official interpretation, etc.