Abstract
There are many interactions between judges at the Czech Constitutional Court from which it is possible to observe different dimensions if their relations. Jan Chmel examined coalitions among the con- stitutional judges in terms of the rate of consensus in voting.
Hitherto relations between constitutional judges exercising dissenting opinions remained unexplored. A dissenting opinion can be exercised by a constitutional judge solitarily or jointly with other judges.
This paper aims to examine the relationships between the judges of the Constitutional Court exercising dissenting opinions in the three decades of its existence using the method of social network analysis. The existing literature using empirical methods in the field of dissenting opinions has been limited to examining a specific period or cases with an economic or social aspect.
A comprehensive analysis covering all three decades of the Constitutional Court fills this gap. The results of this work prove that the third decade of the Constitutional Court represents the most polarized period.