Prześlij tekst
Nr 2 (134) (2023)
Articles

A concept at the edge of national and European constitutional law: different understandings within the same region. Constitutional identity in Poland and Hungary

PDF (Angielski)
  • Boldizsár Szentgáli-Tóth
Boldizsár Szentgáli-Tóth
Centre for Social Sciences, Institute for Legal Studies

Opublikowane 2023-01-17

Słowa kluczowe

  • constitutional identity,
  • constitutional review,
  • law of the European Union,
  • omparative constitutional law,
  • constitutional interpretation

Prawa autorskie (c) 2023 Contemporary Central & East European Law

Creative Commons License

Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa 4.0 Międzynarodowe.

Jak cytować

A concept at the edge of national and European constitutional law: different understandings within the same region. Constitutional identity in Poland and Hungary . (2023). Contemporary Central & East European Law, 2 (134), 9–31. https://doi.org/10.37232/cceel.2022.02

Abstrakt

The Polish Constitution does not expressly postulate the term of constitutional identity, however the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland has elaborated this concept in detail in its case law. This framework has been used to justify internal reforms; however, it has been mostly applied as a constitutional argument for the protection of national sovereignty within the European legal space.
Similarly, the Hungarian Constitutional Court has stated:
The constitutional identity of Hungary does not constitute the exhaustive and closed list of values, but some of its elements may be highlighted as examples, which are identical with the recently acknowledged constitutional values: the fundamental rights; the separation of powers; the republican form of state; the freedom of religion; the rule of law; parliamentarian; equality under the law; the respect of the judicial power; and the protection of the nationalities living together with us.
My study aims to make a comparison between the relevant case-law of the two constitutional courts and provide some recommendations on how constitutional identity should be reconceptualized; separated more clearly from other forms of identity; and how it could fulfil its task more efficiently at the edge of the national and European legal orders with the help of European-wide standards.

PDF (Angielski)

Bibliografia

  1. ‘Parliamentary questions, Question for written answer E-001444-19 to the Commission Rule, 130, Csaba Molnár (S&D)’, <https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-8-2019-001444_EN.html> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  2. Article R(3) of the Fundamental Law of Hungary of 25 April 2011, <https://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain/opendocpdf.pdf?reldoc=y&docid=54412e794> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  3. Bakó B, ‘The Zauberlehrling Unchained? The Recycling of the German Federal Constitutional Court’s Case Law on Identity-, Ultra Vires- and Fundamental Rights Review in Hungary’ (2018) ZaöRV vol. 78, 863–902 <https://www.zaoerv.de/78_2018/78_2018_4_a_863_902.pdf> accessed 2 Feb 2022.
  4. Besselink LFM, ‘National and Constitutional Identity before and after Lisbon’ (2010) Utrecht L Rev 6(3), 36–49 <http://doi.org/10.18352/ulr.139>.
  5. Biernat S, Kawczyńska M, ‘The Role of the Polish Constitution (Pre-2016): Development of a Liberal Democracy in the European and International Context’ in A Albi, S Bardutzky (eds), National Constitutions in European and Global Governance: Democracy, Rights, the Rule of Law (T.M.C Asser Press 2019) 745–794, <https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-273-6_16>.
  6. Blutman L, ‘Az Alkotmánybíróság és az előzetes döntéshozatali eljárás’ [The Constitutional Court and requests for preliminary ruling] (2015) Közjogi Szemle vol. 4, 1–8.
  7. Bogdandy von A, ‘The European Constitution and European Identity: Text and Subtext of the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe’ (2005) ICON vol. 2–3, 295–315 <https://www.doi.org/10.1093/icon/moi021>.
  8. Bogdandy von A, Schill S, ‘Die Achtung der nationalen Identität unter dem reformierten Unionsvertrag’ (2010) ZaöRV vol. 70, 701–734 <https://www.zaoerv.de/70_2010/70_2010_4_a_701_734.pdf> accessed 12 Mar 2022.
  9. Brack N, Coman R, Crespy A, ‘Sovereignty Conflicts in the European Union’ (2019) Les Cahiers du Cevipol vol.4, 3–30 <https://www.cairn.info/revue-les-cahiers-du-cevipol-2019-4-page-3.htm> accessed 31 Nov 2021.
  10. Bragyova A, Gárdos-Orosz F, ‘Vannak-e megváltoztathatatlan normák az Alaptörvényben?’ [Are there unamendable provisions at the Fundamental Law?] (2016) Állam- és Jogtudomány vol. 3, 35–63 <http://real.mtak.hu/43468/1/2016_03_BragyovaA_GardosOroszF.pdf> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  11. Burján E, Szentgáli-Tóth B, ‘A Cursory Glance on the Hungarian Administrative Justice System After Two Main Reform Attempts’ (2015) Dublin Law & Politics Review, 1–15 <http://real.mtak.hu/116981> accessed 28 Oct 2021.
  12. Chronowski N, A Vincze, ‘Önazonosság és európai integráció – az Alkotmánybíróság az identitáskeresés útján’ [Self-identity and European integration – the Constitutional Court looking for identity] (2017) Jogtud Köz vol. 3, 117–132 <http://real.mtak.hu/id/eprint/100617> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  13. Cloots E, ‘National Identity, Constitutional Identity, and Sovereignty in the EU’ (2016) Neth J Leg Philos vol. 2, 82–98 <https://www.doi.org/10.5553/NJLP/.000049>.
  14. Commission Working Document of 20 July 2021, 2021 Rule of Law Report: Country Chapter on the rule of law situation in Poland SWD(2021) 722 final, <https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/2021_rolr_country_chapter_poland_en.pdf> accessed 9 Oct 2021.
  15. Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union [2008] JoL C 115.
  16. Csink L, ‘Az Alaptörvény identitása – Honnan hová?’ [The identity of the Fundamental Law: from where to where?] (2015) Acta Univ Szeged vol. 78, 134–141 <http://acta.bibl.u-szeged.hu/45269/1/juridpol_078_134-141.pdf> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  17. Czapliński W, ‘Recent Constitutional Jurisprudence Concerning the European Union: Some Remarks on 2010 Judgments of the Polish Constitutional Court’ (2011) ERA Forum vol. 12, 97–204 <https://www.doi.org/10.1007/s12027-011-0206-z>.
  18. Decision of Second Senate of 18 July 2017 [2017] BVerfGE 146.
  19. Decision of Zweiten Senats of 14 January 2014 [2014] BVerfGE 134.
  20. Drinóczi T, ‘Az alkotmányos identitásról. Mi lehet az értelme az alkotmányos identitás alkotmányjogi fogalmának?’ [From constitutional identity: what might be the advantages of constitutional identity?] (2016) MTA Law Working Papers 3(15), 1–42 <http://real.mtak.hu/121445/> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  21. Drinóczi T, ‘Constitutional Identity in Europe: The Identity of the Constitution. A Regional Approach’ (2020) Ger Law J 21(2), 105–130 <https://www.doi.org/10.1017/glj.2020.1>.
  22. Drinóczi T, ‘Újra az alkotmányozó, az alkotmánymódosító hatalomról és az alkotmányellenes alkotmánymódosításról – az Alaptörvény alapján’ [Again the constitution-making power, from the constitution-amending power and from unconstitutional constitutional amendments on the ground of the Fundamental Law] (2015) Jogtud Köz 70(7–8), 361–378 <https://matarka.hu/klikk.php?cikkmutat=2250631&mutat=http://real-j.mtak.hu/1901/32/jk1578.pdf> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  23. Dudzik S, Półtorak N, ‘The Court of the Last Word. Competences of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal in the Review of European Law’ (2012) Yearb Pol Eur Stud 15, 225–258 <http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.cejsh-e4e3acc9-c00c-44ea-ae46-0b38fad00a88> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  24. Fejes Z, ‘Constitutional Identity and Historical Constitution Clause in the Hungarian Fundamental Law and Its Effects on Constitutional Interpretation’ in Z Szente, F Mandák, Z Fejes (eds) Challenges and Pitfalls in the Recent Hungarian Constitutional Development (L’Harmattan 2015) 25–44.
  25. Fundamental Law of Hungary (prior to the Ninth Amendment, adopted on 15 December 2020), CDL-REF(2021)046, <https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-REF(2021)046-e> accessed 20 Mar 2022.
  26. Jacobsohn GJ, Constitutional Identity (HUP 2010).
  27. Jovanović M, ‘Sovereignty – Out, Constitutional Identity – In: The ‘Core Areas’ of Controversy of EU Membership’ (2015) Acta Jur Hung vol. 56, 249–267 <https://doi.org/10.1556/026.2015.56.4.2>.
  28. Judgement of Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 7 October 2021, K 3/21 (2021) OTK-A 65.
  29. Judgement of Second Senate 2 BvE 2/08 – 2 BvE 5/08 – 2 BvR 1010/08 – 2 BvR 1022/08 – 2 BvR 1259/08 – 2 BvR 182/09 [2009] BVerfGE 123.
  30. Judgement of the ECJ C-208/09 EU:C:2010:806.
  31. Judgement of the ECJ C-364/10 EU:C:2012:630.
  32. Judgement of the ECJ C-391/09 EU:C:2011:291.
  33. Judgement of the ECJ C-393/10 EU:C:2012:110.
  34. Judgement of the ECJ C-438/14 EU:C:2016:401.
  35. Judgement of the ECJ C-51/15 EU:C:2016:985.
  36. Judgement of the ECJ C-58/13 EU:C:2014:2088.
  37. Judgement of the ECJ C-6/64 EU:C:1964:66.
  38. Judgement of the ECJ C-673/16 EU:C:2018:385.
  39. Judgement of the ECJ T-529/13 EU:T:2016:282.
  40. Judgement of the EJC C-11/70 EU:C:1970:114.
  41. Judgement of the EJC C-202/11 EU:C:2013:239.
  42. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 1 December 2010, SK 50/07 (2010) OTK-A 130.
  43. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 1 June 2010, P 38/09 (2010) OTK-A 53.
  44. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 10 July 2000, SK 12/99 (2000) OTK 143.
  45. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 10 June 2008, P 15/08 (2008) OTK-A 105.
  46. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 10 November 2010, K 32/09 (2010) OTK-A 108.
  47. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 12 February 2008, P 62/07 (2008) OTK-A 17.
  48. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 12 January 2000, P 11/98 (2000) OTK 3.
  49. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 12 January 2005, K 24/04 (2005) OTK-A 3.
  50. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 13 April 2010, P 35/09 (2010) OTK-A 39.
  51. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 15 July 2010, K 63/07 (2010) OTK-A 60.
  52. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 15 June 2021, P 7/20 (2021) OTK-A 49.
  53. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 15 November 2008, P 57/07 (2008) OTK-A 178.
  54. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 16 July 2009, KP 4/08 (2009) OTK-A 112.
  55. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 17 June 2007, P 16/06 (2007) OTK-A 79.
  56. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 18 February 2009, KP 3/08 (2009) OTK-A 9.
  57. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 19 December 2006, P 37/05 (2006) OTK-A 177.
  58. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 19 February 2003, P 11/02 (2003) OTK-A 12.
  59. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 2 June 2007, K 41/05 (2007) OTK-A 72.
  60. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 20 April 2020, U 2/20 [2020] OTK-A 61.
  61. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 21 April 2004, K 33/03 (2004) OTK-A 31.
  62. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 22 June 2005, K 18/04 (2005) OTK-A 49.
  63. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 22 October 2021, K 1/20 (2021) OTK-A 4.
  64. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 24 February 1997, K 19/96 (1997) OTK 6.
  65. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 27 April 2004, P 16/03 (2004) OTK-A 36.
  66. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 27 April 2005, P 1/05 (2005) OTK-A 42.
  67. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 27 May 2003, K 11/03 (2003) OTK-A 43.
  68. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 28 April 1999, K 3/99 (1999) OTK 73.
  69. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 28 January 2003, K 2/02 (2003) OTK-A 4.
  70. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 28 January 2020, Kpt 1/20 [2020] OTK-A 60.
  71. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 28 June 2000, K 25/99 (2000) OTK 141.
  72. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 28 October 2009, KP 3/09 (2009) OTK-A 138.
  73. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 29 November 2001, P 8/01 (2001) OTK 268.
  74. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 30 May 2005, P 14/04 (2005) OTK-A 47.
  75. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 31 January 2005, P 9/04 (2005) OTK-A 9.
  76. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 31 May 2004, K 15/04 (2004) OTK-A 47.
  77. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 5 January 1999, K 27/98 (1999) OTK 1.
  78. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 5 June 2001, K 18/00 (2001) OTK 118.
  79. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 7 November 2007, K 18/06 (2007) OTK-A 122.
  80. Judgement of the Polish Constitutional Tribunal of 8 May 2000, SK 22/99 (2000) OTK 107.
  81. Judgment of Second Senate of 12 October 1993 BVerfGE 89 [1993].
  82. Judgment of Second Senate of 15 December 1970 BVerfGE 30 [1970].
  83. Kelemen RD, Pech L, ‘The Uses and Abuses of Constitutional Pluralism: Undermining the Rule of Law in the Name of Constitutional Identity in Hungary and Poland’ (2019) Camb Yearb Eur Leg Stud vol. 21, 59–74 <https://doi.org/10.1017/cel.2019.11>.
  84. Kéri V, Pozsár-Szentmiklósy Z, ‘Az Alkotmánybíróság határozata az Alaptörvény E) cikkének értelmezéséről’ [The ruling of the Constitutional Court from the interpretation of Article E) of the Fundamental Law’] (2017) JeMa vol. 1–2, 5–15, <https://jema.hu/article.php?c=469> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  85. Konstadinides T, ‘Constitutional Identity as a Shield and as a Sword: The European Legal Order within the Framework of National Constitutional Settlement’ (2011) Camb Yearb Eur Leg Stud vol. 13, 195–218 <https://www.doi.org/10.5235/152888712801753031>.
  86. Konstytucja Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej z dnia 2 kwietnia 1997 r. [Constitution of the Republic of Poland] [1997] JoL 483.
  87. Kukorelli I, ‘Az Alaptörvény és az Európai Uni’ [The fundamental law and the European Union] (2013) Pro Bono Publico 1(1), 4–11 <https://folyoirat.ludovika.hu/index.php/ppbmk/article/view/3129/2379> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  88. Kustra-Rogatka A, ‘Constitutional Identity as Implied Limits of Constitutional Amendment Powers. The Case of Poland’ (2019) TSP-W vol. 15, 39–53 <http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/TSP-W.2019.003>.
  89. Miąsik D, Szwarc M, ‘Effectiveness of EU Directives in National Courts – Judicial Dialogue Continues: The Court of Justice’s Judgment in C-545/17 Pawlak’ (2019) PYIL vol. 39, 267–284 <https://doi.org/10.24425/pyil.2020.134485>.
  90. Miháliková V, ‘National and Constitutional Identity in the Case-Law of Constitutional Courts of the Visegrad Group’ (2020) Stud Iurid Cass 8(1), 38–50 <https://doi.org/10.33542/SIC2020-1-04>.
  91. Minkkinen P, ‘Political Constitutionalism Versus Political Constitutional Theory: Law, Power, and Politics’ (2013) ICON 11(3), 585–610 <https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mot020>.
  92. Polzin M, ‘Constitutional Identity, Unconstitutional Amendments and the Idea of Constituent Power: The Development of the Doctrine of Constitutional Identity in German Constitutional Law’ (2016) ICON 14(2), 411–438 <https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mow035>.
  93. Popławski K, ‘Introductory Parts to the Constitutions of Visegrad Group Countries. Their Relevance, Constitutional Identity and Relation Towards European Constitutional Identity’ (2019) Central European Papers 7(1), 25–50 <http://cejsh.icm.edu.pl/cejsh/element/bwmeta1.element.desklight-beb43450-9f00-408b-a665-88e3610a679b> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  94. Poplzin M, Verfassungsidentität (Mohr Siebeck 2018).
  95. Preshova D, ‘Battleground or Meeting Point? The Respect for National Identities in the European Union – Article 4(2) The Treaty on the European Union’ (2012) Croat Yearb Eur Law Policy vol. 8, 267–298 <https://hrcak.srce.hr/clanak/139309> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  96. Rezler P, ‘The Copenhagen Criteria: Are They Helping or Hurting the European Union?’ (2011) Touro Law Rev vol. 14, 390–411 <https://www.tourolaw.edu/ilr/uploads/articles/v14_2/5.pdf> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  97. Rosenfeld M, The Identity of the Constitutional Subject (Routledge 2010).
  98. Ruling of the Czech Constitutional Court on the constitutionality of the Lisbon Treaty, ÚS 29/09 [2013], <https://www.cvce.eu/content/publication/2013/10/22/c746a974-58eb-4907-b022-c9f486b6c3d2/publishable_en.pdf> accessed 6 Oct 2021.
  99. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 11/2020.(VI.3.) [2020] ABH 1118-1131.
  100. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 12/2017.(VI.19.) [2017], <https://hunconcourt.hu/uploads/sites/3/2018/11/12_2017_en_final.pdf> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  101. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 13/2013.(VI.17.) [2013] ABH.
  102. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 143/2010.(VII.14.) [2010] ABH 698.
  103. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 15/2019.(IV.17.) [2019] ABH. Ruling of the Constitutional Court, 19/2019.(VI.18.) [2019], <https://hunconcourt.hu/uploads/sites/3/2019/12/19_2019_eng_final.pdf> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  104. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 2/2016.(II.8.) [2016] ABH.
  105. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 2/2019.(III.5.) [2019] ABH 28-62.
  106. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 22/2016.(XII.5.) [2017], <https://hunconcourt.hu/uploads/sites/3/2017/11/en_22_2016-1.pdf> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  107. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 22/2020.(VIII.4.) [2020] ABH 2048.
  108. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 23/2015.(VII.7.) [2015] ABH 548.
  109. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 28/2013.(X.9.) [2013] ABH 865.
  110. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 3072/2015.(IV.23.) [2015] ABH 1616.
  111. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 3130/2016.(VI.29.) [2016] ABV 16.
  112. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 33/2012.(VII.17.) [2012], <https://hunconcourt.hu/uploads/sites/3/2017/11/en_0033_2012.pdf> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  113. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 33/2021.(XII.22.) [2021] ABH.
  114. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 45/2012.(XII.29.) [2012], <https://hunconcourt.hu/uploads/sites/3/2017/11/en_0045_2012.pdf> [accessed 19.03.2022].
  115. Ruling of the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 7/2014.(III.7.) [2014] ABH.
  116. Ruling on the Hungarian Constitutional Court, 61/2011.(VII.13.) [2011] ABH 290.
  117. Śledzińska-Simon A, ‘Constitutional Identity in 3D: A Model of Individual, Relational, and Collective Self and Its Application in Poland’ (2015) ICON 13(1), 124–155 <https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mov007>.
  118. Śledzinska-Simon A, Ziółkowski M, ‘Constitutional Identity in Poland: Is the Emperor Putting on the Old Clothes of Sovereignty?’ in C Calliess, G van der Schyff (eds), Constitutional Identity in a Europe of Multilevel Constitutionalism (CUP 2019) 243–267, <https://www.doi.org/10.1017/9781108616256.012>.
  119. Soltys A, ‘The Obligation to Interpret National Law in Accordance with the European Law in the Jurisprudence of Polish Constitutional Court – Focus on Limits’ (2017) EJPM vol. 1, 51–62 <https://wpia.uwm.edu.pl/czasopisma/sites/default/files/uploads/EJPM/2017/1/52-63.pdf> accessed 14 Oct 2021.
  120. Stumpf I, ‘Sovereignty, Constitutional Identity and European Law’ (2020) Hung Rev 11(3), 35–46 <https://hungarianreview.com/article/20200515_sovereignty_constitutional_identity_and_european_law/> accesed 7 Nov 2021.
  121. Sulyok M, ‘Nemzeti és alkotmányos identitás a nemzeti alkotmánybíróságok gyakorlatában’ [National and constitutional identity in the case law of national constitutional courts] in MA Jakó (ed), Nemzeti identitás és alkotmányos identitás az Európai Unió és a tagállamok viszonylatában (SZTE-ÁJK 2014) 44–62, <http://acta.bibl.u-szeged.hu/63836/> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  122. Sulyok T, Deli G, ‘A nemzeti identitás az Alkotmánybíróság gyakorlatában’ [National identity at the case law of the Constitutional Court] (2019) AB Szem vol. 1, 57–59.
  123. Suteu S, Eternity Clauses in Democratic Constitutionalism (OUP 2021), <https://www.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198858867.001.0001>.
  124. Szente Z, ‘Történeti alkotmány és a Szent Korona az új Alaptörvényben’ [Historical constitution and Holy Crown in the Fundamental Law] (2011) Közjogi Szemle vol. 3, 1–13.
  125. Tatham AF, ‘A case of ‘Friendliness is next to Stateliness’? The Migration of Constitutional Ideas on Euro-Conform Interpretation of National Law’ (2013) Revija za evropsko parvo 15(1), 5–37 <http://scindeks.ceon.rs/article.aspx?artid=1450-79861301005T> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  126. Tatham AF, Central European Constitutional Courts in the Face of EU Membership. The Influence of the German Model in Hungary and Poland (Martinus Nijhoff 2013).
  127. Trócsányi L, ‘Nemzeti alkotmányok, európai integráció és alkotmányos identitás’ [National constitutions, European integration and constitutional identity] (2017) Acta Univ Szeged vol. 1, 319–328 <http://acta.bibl.u-szeged.hu/45281/1/juridpol_078_319-328.pdf> accesssed 19 Mar 2022.
  128. Tuleja P, ‘The Polish Constitutional Tribunal’ in A von Bogdandy, P Huber, C Grabenwarter (eds), The Max Planck Handbooks in European Public Law. Vol 3: Constitutional Adjudication: Institutions (Oxford University Press 2020) 619–672, <https://www.doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198726418.003.0012>.
  129. Várnay E, ‘Az Európai Bíróság ítélete a Magyarország kontra Szlovákia ügyben’ [The judgement of the European Court of Justice in the case Hungary v. Slovakia.] (2013) JeMa vol. 4, 80–91 <https://jema.hu/article.php?c=283> accessed 19 Mar 2022.
  130. Vincze A, ‘Előzetes döntéshozatal és alkotmánybíráskodás’ [Request for preliminary ruling and constitutional review] (2018) Alkotmánybírósági Szemle vol. 1, 22–30.
  131. Voßkuhle A, Verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit und europäische Integration (Bundesverfassungsgerichts 2012), <https://www.vfgh.gv.at/downloads/verfassungsgerichtsbarkeit_und_europaeische_integration_(hup.pdf> accessed 3 Nov 2021.
  132. Wendel M, ‘Exceeding Judicial Competence in the Name of Democracy: The German Federal Constitutional Court’s OMT Reference’ (2014) Eur Const Law Rev 10(2), 263–307 <https://doi.org/10.1017/S1574019614001187>.