Selected Methods of Empirical Analysis of the Constitutional Court's Decisions Concerning Constitutional Review of Statutes
Abstract
The aim of this article is to explore the relationship between the decision-making of the judges of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic in the proceeding on derogation of statues and their attitudes (ideologies). Whereas the attitudes of judges are unobservable, the political ideology (party) of the president, who appointed the judges, was chosen as their proxy.
The analysis is limited to decisions, in which the proposer of derogation of a statute was a group of members of the Chamber of Deputies or a group of members of the Senate. The reason being that with the exception of the president, they are the only persons with a clear political affiliation who are entitled to propose derogation of a statute to the Constitutional Court.
Thus, the aim of this analysis can be reformulated as exploring the success rate of proposals for derogation of statutes in relation to the groups of judges appointed by the same president, based on the political affiliation of the proposer.