PROTECTION OF FREEDOM AND RIGHTS OF CITIZENS BEFORE THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF NORTH MACEDONIA

Abstract

The paper analyzes the protection of freedoms and human rights before the Constitutional Court of the
Republic of North Macedonia. The constitutional framework of freedoms and rights whose protection is under the
jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court of the Republic is contained in the provision of Article 110, line 3 of the
Constitution. It is very narrow and covers the following human freedoms and rights: freedom of belief, conscience,
thought and public expression of thought, political association and action and the prohibition of discrimination
against citizens on the grounds of sex, race, religion, national, social and political affiliation. Such a narrow
framework of freedoms and rights whose protection may be subject to proceedings before the Constitutional Court is
not in accordance with the provision of Article 50, paragraph 1 of the Constitution according to which “Every
citizen can invoke the protection of freedoms and rights established by the Constitution before the courts and before
the Constitutional Court of the Republic of North Macedonia in a procedure based on the principles of priority and
urgency.” This inconsistency creates confusion in the interpretation and application of the Constitution. The
confusion has been somewhat removed by Article 51 of the Rules of Procedure of the Constitutional Court, which
accepts the narrowed constitutional framework. But the Rules of Procedure are bylaws that must be fully based on
the constitutional provisions and derive from them.
The second chapter of the paper analyzes the procedure for protection of human rights and freedoms before the
Constitutional Court of the Republic. From the analysis of the work of the Constitutional Court in the procedures for
protection of human rights and freedoms, it can be concluded that the citizens do not have much trust in the
Constitutional Court. In this regard, there are indications that the Constitutional Court views the work on these cases
as a secondary, less important matter. Therefore, he does not pay due attention to them which is opposed to efforts to
ensure effective protection of human rights in a democratic world.
Finally, the third chapter of the paper analyzes the need to introduce a constitutional complaint, ie a lawsuit in the
legal system of the Republic of Northern Macedonia. This chapter points out the division of the expert public in the
Republic regarding the need to introduce this legal remedy in the system of constitutional protection of human rights
and freedoms. A comparative review of this issue is then given by listing the countries in which this remedy has
been introduced. After the comparative review, the position of the author regarding the introduction of this legal
remedy in the Macedonian legal system is presented. According to the author, the introduction of a constitutional
complaint or lawsuit will be a particularly major reform in the protection of human rights in the Republic of North
Macedonia. Its introduction will significantly contribute to the improvement of the responsibility in the work and the
quality of the decisions made by the judges in the regular courts and the officials in the state administration bodies.
They, knowing that their decision may finally go to review in the Constitutional Court, will undoubtedly work more
responsibly and with better quality in conducting proceedings and making decisions.