Types of Access to Constitutional Jurisdiction with Emphasis on Constitutional Complaint

Document Type : Original Article


1 Family Institute, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran.

2 Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran.


Constitutional jurisdiction, prior to the advent of broad wave of human rights concepts (almost before 1945), can be examined primarily within the framework of institutional constitutional law. At that historical period, the administration of constitutional justice, wich had the primary purpose of ensuring the stability of governmental structures and the existing separation of powers and observance the hierarchy of norms, was usually abstract. The supervision of the constitutional courts at that time was mostly priori, and in cases where posteriori review had been foreseen, referral of the petition was merely a matter for the authority of government officials, such as the president or prime minister. After the end of the Second World War and the movement of legal systems towards libertarian constitutional law, tangible changes were made in the functions of these institutions. From now on, different countries have provided individuals access to these institutions in various ways in order to pursue their fundamental rights and freedoms. Among all of the predicted ways of accessing constitutional jurisdiction, the constitutional complaint has come up with wider grasp. Constitutional complaint is the most effective way of guaranteeing and protecting fundamental freedoms. In this paper, after classifying and reviewing the different ways of access to constitutional jurisdiction, considering the importance of constitutional complaint and answering questions related to the components and principles of this method, its significant effects on the formation of participatory democracy and the theory of human rights in a country will be considered as the basis for the constitutional complaint.


Main Subjects

1.کلسن، هانس، نظریه حقوقی ناب، ترجمه اسماعیل نعمت‌الهی، تهران: سمت،چاپ دوم، 1391.
2. بن، پیر ،اساسی سازی حقوق اسپانیا، ترجمه جواد تقی‌زاده، نشریه حقوق اساسی، زمستان 1385، شماره 5، صص224–248.
3.تقی زاده، جواد،مسأله اساسی سازی نظم حقوقی، مجله پژوهش های حقوقی شهر دانش،بهار- تابستان 1383، شماره 11،صص 122–69.
4.جلالی، محمد، و رضوان ضیائی،نقش آمبودزمانها در توسعه و ارتقای مردمسالاری، فصلنامه پژوهش حقوق عمومی، تابستان 1392، شماره 15، صص 129-166.
5.Alexy, Robert, A Theory of Constitutional Rights, 2nd edn :Oxford University Press, USA, 2009.
6. Cappelletti, Mauro, Judicial Review in Comparative Perspective: California Law review Incorporated, 1970.
7. Habermas, Jürgen, The Postnational Constellation: Political Essays, ed. by Max Pensky, 1st edn: MIT Press, 2001.
8. Stone Sweet, Alec, Constitutional Dialogues in the European Community: Robert Schuman Centre, 1995.
9. Reif, Linda C., The ombudsman, good governance, and the international human rights system: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2004.
10. Brinks, Daniel M., and Abby Blass, ‟Rethinking Judicial Empowerment: The New Foundations of Constitutional Justiceʺ, International Journal of Constitutional Law 15 (2017): 296–331.
11. Crossland, Hans Gerald, ‟Rights of the Individual to Challenge Administrative Action before Administrative Courts in France and Germanyʺ, International and Comparative Law Quarterly 24 (1975): 707–47.
12. European Commission for Democracy through Law (Venice Commission), ‘Study on Individual Access To Constitutional Justice’, 2011: 17–18.
13. Ferejohn, John, and Pasquale Pasquino, ‟Constitutional Adjudication: Lessons from Europeʺ, Texas Law Review 82 (2004): 1671–1704.
14. Grazia, Maria, and CRISTINA ELÍAS Méndez, ‟Current Trends and Perspectives Regarding 15. Constitutional Jurisdiction in the Member States of the Euʺ, Rivista Di Studi Politici Internazionali 80 (2013): 553–74.
15 .Grimm, Dieter, ‟The Role of Fundamental Rights after Sixty-Five Years of Constitutional Jurisprudence in Germanyʺ, International Journal of Constitutional Law 13 (2015): 9–29.
16. Karakamisheva, Tanja, ‟Constitutional Complaint-Procedural and Legal Instrument for Development of the Constitutional Justice (Case Study–Federal Republic of Germany, Republic of Croatia, Republic of Slovenia and Republic of Macedonia)ʺ, in A Paper Presented at the World Conference on Constitutional Justice, the Constitutional Court of South Africa and the Venice Commission, Cape Town, 2009, xxiv: 1–16.
17. Kelsen, Hans, ‟Judicial Review of Legislation: A Comparative Study of the Austrian and the American Constitutionʺ, The Journal of Politics 4 (1942): 183–200.
18. Llorente, Francisco Rubio, Constitutionalism In The" Integrated" States Of Europe (Jean Monnet Chair, 1997).
19. Mercer, Peter P, ‟The Citizen’s Right to Sue in the Public Interest: The Roman Actio Popularis Revisitedʺ, UW Ontario L. Rev. 21 (1983): 89-103.
20. Rezie, Richard C O, and Mon Sep, ‟The Ukrainian Constitution: Interpretations of the Citizens’ Rights Provisionsʺ, Case W. Res. J. Int’l L 31 (1999): 169–210.
21. Singer, Michael, ‟The Constitutional Court of the German Federal Republic: Jurisdiction over Individual Complaintsʺ, Int’l & Comp. L.Q 31 (1982): 331–56.
22. Sweet, Alec Stone, ‟The Politics of Constitutional Review in France and Europeʺ, International Journal of Constitutional Law 5 (2007): 69–92.
23. Wilhelm Karl, Geck, ‟Judicial Review of Statutes A Comparative Survey of Present Institutions and Practicesʺ, Cornell L. Q 51 (1965): 250–304.
24. Haas, Julia, Der Ombudsmann als Institution des europäischen Verwaltungsrechts: zur Neubestimmung der Rolle des Ombudsmanns als Organ der Verwaltungskontrolle auf der Grundlage europäischer Ombudsmann-Einrichtungen. Vol. 13. Mohr Siebeck, 2012
25. Heun, Werner. Verfassung und Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit im Vergleich. Mohr Siebeck, 2014.
26. Schmidt, Günter, Rechtsanwendung und Rechtskontrolle in der Europäischen Union: Beiträge aus dem Fernstudieninstitut. BOD GmbH DE, 2013.
27. Tornos, De, and Magdalena, Maria. Der Ombudsmann: Vergleichender Überblick zwischen dem Vereinigten Königreich, Frankreich und Österreich und dessen sprachlich terminologische Analyse. Diss. uniwien, 2009.
28. Grimm, Dieter, "Zum Verhältnis von Interpretationslehre, Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit und Demokratieprinzip bei Kelsen", in: Ideologiekritik und Demokratietheorie bei Hans Kelsen, RechtstheorieBeiheft 4 (1982): 142.
29. Gusy, Christoph. "Die Verfassungsbeschwerde", in: Das Bundesverfassungsgericht im politischen System. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2006. 201-213.
30. Hess, Burkhard. "Rechtsfragen des Vorabentscheidungsverfahrens." Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und internationales Privatrecht/The Rabel Journal of Comparative and International Private Law, H. 2/3 (2002): 470-502.
31. Hwang, Shu-Perng, ‟Rechtsanwendung in der pluralistischen Demokratie: Hans Kelsens Verständnis der Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit unter besonderer Berücksichtigung seiner Demokratietheorieʺ, Der Staat 46 (2007): 442-462.
32. Schöpfer, Eduard Christian, "Volksanwaltschaft in Österreich." Schwerpunkte Grund-und Menschenrechte aus den Jahresberichten (2001): 108.
33. Su, Yeong-chin, "Verfassungsbeschwerden gegen gerichtliche Urteite", in: Heun, Werner/Starck, Christian (edts.), Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit im Rechtsvergleich, Nomos 2006, 92-112.