THE EXTENT OF THE PERMISSIBILITY OF ABANDONING THE AUTHORITATIVE PROVISIONS AND DECISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL JUDICIARY

Abstract

The constitution must be a living work capable of evolving with the development of society, and the legislator has the right to take new legislative measures that were considered contrary to the constitution years ago. In this research, we will show the position of jurisprudence and the Jordanian and comparative constitutional judiciary regarding the permissibility of abandoning the provisions of the constitution.
The constitutional lawsuit is a concrete lawsuit that focuses on specific legal provisions, and that the opponent in the constitutional lawsuit is not one of the parties to the lawsuit, but is the legal text as long as it is applicable in any part of the constitutional lawsuit, even if it relates to a procedural aspect of the lawsuit.
Non-compliance of the Constitutional Court with the decisions and rulings issued by them in the constitutional cases before it, which means the possibility of reconsidering those cases that have already been adjudicated, and the consequent possibility of reversing the previous rulings and contradictions in the rulings, which weakens confidence in the fairness of the constitutional judiciary , which is inconsistent with the authoritative nature of the rulings issued in the constitutional case, as they are final rulings that cannot be appealed in any way.