François, Bastien2016-12-042016-12-041995Ruch Prawniczy, Ekonomiczny i Socjologiczny, 57, 1995, z. 2, s. 147-1600035-9629http://hdl.handle.net/10593/16205The subject of F. Bastien's lecture given to Polish students within the framwork of Tempus cooperation is the procedure of controlling the conformity the of laws with the constitution. Although the idea of such a control was born in the USA at the beginning of the 19th century, it was introduced in Europe only in the 20th century. The first part of the article concerns the development of constitutional justice in Europe, from the first Constitutional Court in Austria till the latest legal changes after 1989. At the moment all written constitutions in the European states provide the control of conformity to the constitution of laws stated by parliaments or by special courts. The second part of the article focuses on the French system. According to the French Constitution of 1958, the special court, named Conseil Constitutionnel, is authorised to control the contents of laws (but not decrees, which are controlled by Conseil d'Etat). The procedure can take place only after the vote of the Parliament and before the promulgation of law by President: it is on a priori controlling system. The main part contains the analysis of Conseil Constitutionnel's decisions. As the Constitution of 1958 does not include many specific rules concerning civil rights, the court decided to base its decisions on the Declaration of Civil and Human Rights of 1789 and on the "republican laws". They are both referred to as "especially valuable for the French People" in the Preamble of the Constitution. In this way, the court began - in 1972 - to control the laws not only in their form, but also taking into account their contents. Since then the Conseil Constitutionnel has awarded many decisions precising the notion of liberty, of right to property, of social order and so on. The last part of the lecture contains an evaluation of the development of constitutional control of laws: some scepticism is uttered about the fact, that it i.e. the Parliament is not the representation of nation, but it is the lawyers and clerks who - as the highest authority - decide whether the law id admissible and in conformity with constitution. It may be weakening factor of democracy.polinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessArtykuł