CCR №5 (108) 2015
Changing the order of items in a Constitutional court’s judgments: why does it change the sum?

Abstract

This study shows the key approaches to selection and structuring of arguments by the Russian and South African constitutional courts. The authors focus on cases involving human rights of people living with HIV as illustrations of ineffective techniques used in Russian constitutional practice: absence of an explicit interpretative methodology; inconsistent constitutional and legal analysis; too abstract nature of judgments, including descriptions of their legal consequences; ignoring any discussion of the arguments of the parties, etc. The authors call for critical rethinking and revision of traditional way of writing constitutional judgments in Russia and see South African constitutional practice as a good practical example.

About the author:
Olga Kryazhkova – Associate Professor, Department of Constitutional Law named after N. V. Vitruk of the Russian State University of Justice, Candidate of Sciences (Ph.D.) in Law
Yuliya Rudt – Teaching Assistant, Department of International Law, Novosibirsk State University

Issue articles