Judge Rapporteur and the Panel : On the Influence of the Panel Composition on Decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic about Constitutional Complaints
Abstract
The article deals with the influence of the composition of the panel of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic on the decision about a constitutional complaint. In particular a question is posed, to what extent does the result depend on the judge rapporteur and to what extent on other members of the panel? At first, the author analyses the theoretical context of the question and after that conducts an empirical research.
On the theoretical level, three basic functions of panel decision-making are recognized: legitimacy-strengthening,mistake-correction and achieving deeper consideration of the decision. After that, four types of judicial panel are distinguished: adversarial, strategic, collegial and formal panel.
The theoretical part also clarifies the concept and causes of the so-called panel effect. The empirical research analyses, which type of panel occurs at the Constitutional Court, how does the panel decision-making of the Constitutional Court fulfil its functions, and whether the panel effect can be observed.
The author concludes, that the result of the proceedings about a constitutional complaint depends primarily on the judge rapporteur and the influence of other panel members is weak. The Constitutional court panels thus resemble the model of formal panel.
The panel effect is insignificant in the panel decision-making of the Constitutional court.