Resolution No. 10 of 11 December 2023 in constitutional case No. 20/2023
Referring entity and subject matter of the case
The case has been initiated upon request of 48 MPs of the 49th National Assembly seeking binding interpretation of Article 155, paras 1 and 2 of the Constitution, in particular as pertains to the questions, ‘Is a majority of three quarters of the votes of all Members of the National Assembly in each of the three ballots required for the adoption of a law amending and supplementing the Constitution, as provided for in Article 155, para 1 of the Constitution? Does the absence of a quorum for any of the three ballots requires a fresh review of each of them under the term and procedure of Article 155, para 2, first sentence of the Constitution?’. The applicant reasons the request with contradictory application of the provisions of Article 155, paras 1 and 2 of the Constitution by the ‘different legislatures of the National Assembly’ when reviewing bills amending and supplementing the Basic Law, the latter being ‘the fundamental construct of the modern Bulgarian constitutionalism’.
Summary of reasons
When the Constitutional Court interprets provisions of the Basic Law in the abstract, it tries to reveal the meaning, contents and scope of universal public values and fundamental rules in perspective which by its scale goes beyond a particular problem, whereas the interpretation which the National Assembly makes in the exercise of its functions to ensure primacy of the Constitution is premised on the application of these principles and values in the context of a specific issue at hand. In this way the constitutional legislator has laid the prerequisites for a working mechanism that ensures the balance required for every democracy between the fundament on which it is based and the fresh perspective of constitutionally established values so as to guarantee sustainability of the democratic legal order.
It is essential to point out that this request seeking interpretation of the Basic Law is made in the course of reviewing a proposal for amendments and supplements to the Constitution. The reasons for the request refer in particular to the rules adopted to this end that convey Parliament’s translation of the provisions of Article 155, paras 1 and 2 of the Constitution. However, these rules are not just a procedure in the sense of engineering amendments to the Basic Law but rather a projection how a (regular) National Assembly discharges popular sovereignty against the constitutional continuum.
The Constitution delegates to the Constitutional Court the power to exercise control of the conformity of acts of the National Assembly with the Constitution but not the power to intervene in the process of forming Parliament’s will as to their adoption. In view of the above, such an interference could question the balance between the fundament of the democratic constitutional order and the particular projection of constitutionally established values that is determinative of every sustainable democracy.
To assume that the Court must exercise its power to interpret the Basic Law, in particular the terms and procedure for (a regular) National Assembly to make amendments to it under Article 155 of the Constitution, given the specific circumstances of an ongoing constitutional/legislative procedure entails the risk of the constitutional jurisdiction disrupting the democratic process and in this particular case – confusing the functions of the National Assembly and Constitutional Court.
Grounds for the ruling
Pursuant to Article 149, para 1, item 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Bulgaria (power to provide binding interpretations of the Constitution), the Constitutional Court rejects the request of 48 MPs of the 49th National Assembly seeking binding interpretation of Article 155, paras 1 and 2 of the Constitution and terminates the proceedings in constitutional case No. 20/2023.
Председател: Павлина Панова