64 KB1914 KB60 KB196520251998Bugarič, Bojanštevilka:2letnik:35str. 287-305ISSN:0040-3598COBISSID:2002769URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-IEM6KBCMslFakulteta za sociologijo, politične vede in novinarstvo v LjubljaniTeorija in praksaCentral EuropeEastern EuropepoliticspolitikapristojnostiSrednja Evropaustavna sodiščaVzhodna EvropaUstavna sodišča v srednji in vzhodni Evropi: med sojenjem in politiko|Today, constitutional courts in Central and Eastern Europe can decide almost upon all significant social issues. Their de jure competence, which enables them to cancel decisions of democratically elected legislative bodies, is, comparatively seen, very broad. Slovenian Constitutional court belongs to the most activistic constitutional courts in Central and Eastern Europe. Its broad constitutional and legal authority is also intrepreted broadly and the Court with its decisions frequently intervenes in (cancels) decisions given by democratically elected body - parlament. Such position of a constitutional court in democratic society raises a question of so called "counter-majoritarian difficulty" - i.e. a situation in which a body without direct democratic legitimation (constitutional court) cancels decisions of democratically elected parlament. There is an important question in political theory, namely, what is the legal basis for constitutional court to cancel decisions made by a body, which has more powerful and more direct democratic legitimation. The article deals with and critical analyses the meaning of different legal means in solving the "counter-majoritarian difficulty" in contemporary democratic societyTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of Slovenia