Publication details
Lex Caecilia Didia a její odraz v judikatuře Ústavního soudu
| Title in English | Caecilian Didian Law and its Reflection in Decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic |
|---|---|
| Authors | |
| Year of publication | 2013 |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Description | This rigorous thesis deals with some specific aspects of legislative procedure in ancient Rome that were enacted by the Lex Caecilia Didia in 98 BC (hereinafter referred to as „LCD“). Those aspects are implicitly reflected in some decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic. Both legal and non-legal (literary) sources (especially Cicero) were used. Introductory chapters describe sources of law and legislative procedure. Religious aspects of Roman laws and the problems of retroaction are examined as well. Historical circumstances preceding the enactment of LCD are also examined. LCD consists of two parts. The first one forbids joining miscellaneous provisions into one law in formal sense (lex satura) as it stipulates ne quid per saturam ferretur (that the laws shall be proposed in such a way that one law in formal sense contains only one law in material sense). The other provides for the trinum nundinum (or trinundinum) to elapse between the promulgatio (proposing the bill) and suffragium (ballot). The fifth chapter analyses three decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic that reflect the problems that were in ancient Rome regulated by LCD. Pl.ÚS 77/06 cancels a law because it was containing miscellaneous provisions and its structure was so complicated that orientation in the law was excessively difficult cause it could by compared to Geheimgesetzgebung (i. e. „legislation by stealth“ or „concealed acts“). Pl. ÚS 24/07 restricts the impact of Pl. ÚS 77/06 only to cases when miscellaneous provisions appeared in the law during the legislative procedure via modifying motion without accessorial relationship to the subject matter of the bill (i. e. via so called „wild riders“). Pl. ÚS 55/10 deals with the period between proposing the bill and the ballot. The way of counting the time is also of importance. As a result, we can claim that Roman-law-based knowledge is in this case applicable in the legislative procedure of the Czech republic. |