DIALOGUES BETWEEN CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS OF THE EU MEMBER STATES AND THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU

Abstract

U kontekstu diskursa o ustavnim identitetima, nacionalni ustavni sudovi ulazili su u različite oblike dijaloga sa Sudom eU-a. nakon duljeg vremena isključivo neizravnih manje ili više uspješnih dijaloga realiziranih kroz vlastitu praksu, nacionalni ustavni sudovi počeli su koristiti mogućnost koju im nudi članak 267. Ugovora o funkcioniranju europske unije, odnosno institut prethodnog pitanja. Cilj rada je dokazati da su dijalozi koje ustavni sudovi ostvaruju sa Sudom eU-a koristeći ovaj institut najuspješniji oblik njihove komunikacije. U tu svrhu uspoređivat ćemo tako vođene dijaloge s neizravnim oblicima komunikacije vođenim između ustavnih sudova i Suda eU-a u ranijim razdobljima. U tom kontekstu autor nakon uvodnih razmatranja, u drugom dijelu, razmatra koncept ustavnog identiteta s gledišta Suda eU-a te s gledišta nacionalnih ustavnih sudova. U trećem dijelu autor analizira različite oblike neizravnih dijaloga između ustavnih sudova i Suda eU-a te se u odnosu na njih donose određeni zaključci o njihovoj uspješnosti. U četvrtom dijelu analiziraju se pojedini postupci koje su pred Sudom eU-a pokrenuli ustavni sudovi te se ukazuje na prednosti i nedostatke ovakvih postupaka. na kraju, autor zaključuje kako su postupci koje nacionalni ustavni sudovi pokreću na temelju članka 267. Ugovora o funkcioniranju europske unije najučinkovitiji oblik njihove komunikacije sa Sudom eU-a.In the context of the discourse on constitutional identities, national constitutional courts enter into various forms of dialogue with the Court of Justice of the EU. After having engaged for an extended period of time in exclusively indirect dialogues that were more or less successful and were realised through their own practices, national constitutional courts started making use of the possibility offered to them pursuant to Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, i.e., the preliminary ruling procedure. The paper aims to prove that the dialogues which constitutional courts engage in with the Court of Justice of the EU are the most successful forms of their communication. For that purpose the paper compares these dialogues with indirect forms of communication between constitutional courts and the Court of Justice of the EU. It is in this context that the paper, following introductory considerations in the second part, considers the concept of constitutional identity from the viewpoint of the Court of Justice of the EU and the viewpoint of national constitutional courts. The third part of the paper analyses different forms of indirect dialogue between constitutional courts and the Court of Justice of the EU and draws conclusions about their effectiveness. The fourth part analyses particular procedures instituted before the Court of Justice of the EU by constitutional courts and points out the pros and cons of these procedures. Finally, the paper concludes that the procedures instituted by national constitutional courts pursuant to Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union are the most direct and the most efficient forms of their communication with this Court