The Constitutional Court
On behalf of the Czech Republic
The Constitutional Court decided on 23 June. April 2008 in the plenary in the composition of Stanislav
Package, Francis Skinner (Judge-Rapporteur), Vlasta Formankova, Ivana
Smith, Vladimir Crust, Dagmar Lastovecká, Jiří Mucha, Jan Musil, Jiří
Nykodým, Pavel Rychetský, Miloslav Výborný, Elisabeth Wagner, and Michael
Židlická of the proposal 1. a group of 67 members of Parliament of the Czech Republic,
represented by a member of Mgr. Michal Haškem, 2. a group of 43 members
The Parliament of the Czech Republic, represented by Member of JUDr. Vojtech
Philip and 3. a group of 19 Senators of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, represented by the
JUDr. Kateřina Šimáčkovou, barrister based 612 00 Brno, Moses
17, on the abolition of the fifteenth (Amendment of the Act on State social support),
part of the 16th (Amendment of the Act on assistance in material need), part of the seventeenth
(Amendment of the law on the scope of the authorities of the Czech Republic in the social
Security), part of the 18th (Amendment of the Act on social services),
parts of the 19th (change the law on sickness insurance of employees),
part of the twentieth (Amendment of the Act on health care in the armed forces)
part of the twenty-first (change the law on the extension of maternity leave, the
maternity benefits and allowances for children from sickness insurance),
part of the twenty-second (change the law on the Organization and implementation of social
Security), part of the twenty-fourth (Amendment of the Act on pension
insurance), part of the twenty-fifth (Amendment of the Act on sickness insurance),
part of the twenty-sixth amendment (law amending certain laws in the
connection with the adoption of the law on sickness insurance), part of the twentieth
the seventh (Amendment of the labour code), part of the twenty-eighth (change the law on
soldiers of the occupation), part of the twenty-ninth (change of the Act on the staff
the proportion of members of Security Corps), part of the thirtieth (Amendment of the Act on the
salary and other terms associated with the performance of the functions of representatives of
of State power and some State authorities and judges and members of the European
Parliament), part of the thirty-first (Amendment of the law on salary and some
other aspects of the prosecutors), part of the thirty-second (change
the law on municipalities), part of the thirty-third (Amendment of the Act on regions), part of the
thirty-fourth (Amendment of the Act on the capital city of Prague), part of the thirty-fifth
(amendment law) of the thirty-sixth (Amendment of the law on
employment), part of the thirty-seventh (contribution to the increased life
the cost), part of the thirty-eighth amendment Bill (No 585/2006 Coll., amending
amended Act No. 187/2006 Coll., on sickness insurance, law No. 189/2006
Coll., amending certain laws in connection with the adoption of the law on
Sickness Insurance Act No. 262/2006 SB., labour code, law No.
264/2006 Coll., amending certain laws in connection with the adoption of the
the labour code, Act No. 589/1992 Coll., on social
Security and contribution to the State employment policy, as amended by
amended, law No 117/1995 Coll., on State social support,
as amended, Act No 111/2006 Coll. on assistance in material
need, as amended by Act No. 165/2006 Coll., and Act No. 582/1991 Coll., on the
the Organization and implementation of social security, as amended
provisions), part thirty-ninth (Amendment of the Act on universities) and
part of the forty-fourth (Amendment of the Act on electronic communications)
Act No. 261/2007 Coll. on the stabilization of public budgets, respectively
proposals for the repeal of the provisions of law no parts listed here.
261/2007 Coll. on the stabilization of public budgets, with the participation of the Chamber of Deputies)
the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic and (B)) of the Senate of the Czech
the Republic as parties to the proceedings, and (C)), a group of 43 members of Parliament
Czech Republic, represented by Member of JUDr. Vojtech Filip, and (D))
a group of 19 Senators of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, represented by JUDr.
Kateřina Šimáčkovou, barrister, as a secondary party to the proceedings,
I. the date 30. 6.2008, Act No. 54/1956 Coll., on sickness insurance
employees, in section 15, paragraph. 1 the first sentence, the words shall be deleted:
"If the incapacity lasts more than 3 calendar days". In the provisions of the
§ 15 paragraph. 3 the first sentence of the same Act shall be deleted, the word "fourth".
Also is deleted and the second sentence of section 16 of the same Act, as amended by: "sick leave
According to the first sentence is granted as from the fourth day of the quarantine ".
II. In the remaining part of the proposal is rejected.
The subject of the proceedings
1. The design, the examination of the Constitutional Court of 22 May. October 2007, a group of 67
members of the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, represented by the
Member of Mgr. Michal Haškem, proposed, in accordance with article 87, paragraph. 1 (a).
and the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC) and according to § 64 paragraph. 1 (a). (b)) of the Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the
The Constitutional Court, as amended by later regulations (hereinafter referred to as "the law of
The Constitutional Court "), the cancellation of the entire Act No. 261/2007 Coll., on stabilisation of the
public budgets (the "Act"), or its individual, in
the proposal closer to the designated provisions. In addition, this group 67
the plaintiffs in the same draft proposed the abolition of some, in the proposal for closer
concretized the provisions of laws, amended by Act No. 261/2007
2. The resolution of the plenum of the Constitutional Court of 8 April. January 2008, ref. Pl. ÚS
24/07-147, were excluded to a stand-alone management proposals for the abolition
those parts of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., concerning the content of the separate
the issue of financing of health care from public health
insurance (PL. ÚS 1/08) and proposals to repeal the parts relating to the
the content of the separate social security issues (PL. ÚS 2/08)
3. Under the brand pl. ÚS 24/07 remained on the rest of the management
the proposals, which ended on 31 December 2004. January 2008 the negative finding of the plenum
The Constitutional Court.
Intervention and intervention
4. The applicant in this proceeding is the Group of 67 members of the
the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, represented by Member of Mgr. Michal
Haškem. The Constitutional Court found that brought on the proposal meets all the statutory
procedural formalities. Under section 69, paragraph. 1 of the law on the Constitutional Court are
the participants of the proceedings 1. The Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, 2)
The Parliament of the Czech Republic.
5. The proposal, sent to the Constitutional Court of 19 December. November 2007, proposed
repeal of Act No. 261/2007 Coll., or its individual, closer
designated provisions, also a group of 43 members, represented by a member of the
JUDr. Vojtěch Filip. The Constitutional Court rejected this proposal of resolution
on 23 December 2005. 11.2007, SP. zn. PL. ÚS 28/07, in accordance with section 43, paragraph. 2 (a). (b)),
conjunction with section 43, paragraph. 1 (a). (e) the Act on the Constitutional Court), because of the
obstacles to the lis pendens. A group of 43 MPs became, under section 35
paragraph. 2 of the law on the Constitutional Court, the intervener to this proceeding on the
the design of the group members ' 67.
6. Another proposal, delivered by the Constitutional Court on 7 December. 12.2007, proposed
the cancellation of the marked parts of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll. also group 19
Senators of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, represented by the Attorney, JUDr.
Catherine Šimáčkovou. The Constitutional Court rejected this proposal of resolution
12.12. 2007, SP. zn. PL. ÚS 29/07, in accordance with section 43, paragraph. 2 (a). (b))
conjunction with section 43, paragraph. 1 (a). (e) the Act on the Constitutional Court), because of the
the barriers have previously initiated proceedings. This group of 19 Senators then
It has become, according to § 35 paragraph. 2 of the law on the Constitutional Court, the intervener
This control. Minor parties to proceedings before the Constitutional Court have
the same rights and obligations as its participants (article 28, paragraph 2, of the law on
The Constitutional Court).
7. As regards the argument of plaintiffs and the side of the participants,
compromising the constitutionally prescribed way to acceptance and release of Act No.
261/2007 Coll., as a whole, cannot be other than to refer to the conclusions of the award sp..
PL. ÚS 24/07 of 31 May. January 2008 (announced under no 88/2008 Coll.).
The arguments of a group of 67 members of Parliament of the Czech Republic
8. A group of 67 members of Parliament of the Czech Republic, represented by a member of the
Mgr. Michal Haškem ("appellants"), proposed the abolition of the entire
Act No. 261/2007 Coll., mj. for reasons which are already dealt with in detail
referred to find sp.. PL. ÚS 24/07. For the case of this proposal
This group has not been granted the plaintiffs ' proposed the abolition of the alternative,
part of the fifteenth through twenty-second, twenty-fourth to twenty-ninth, and
part of the forty-fourth of the Act, in particular, that these parts of the content,
teleologicky not formally associated with the tax changes, reduction and
the interference of certain taxes and raising or the implementation of other taxes. The adoption of the
these parts of the Act should be carried out in the form of a special Act.
It is about changes in social benefits, and in procedural law
social security. This extensive transformation of the entire system of social
security should be implemented in a separate Act, or rather in more
laws. The right to social security is different from the legal sector
financial rights and their links in the same legal template makes sense
perhaps only the legislation on income tax and social insurance
Security (part of the twenty-third), whose cancellation is therefore proposed.
The inclusion of these parts to the Act No. 261/2007 Coll. so contradicts the article. 1,
article. 2 (2). 1, article. 6, article. 15 paragraph. (l) and article. paragraph 89. 2 of the Constitution of the Czech
of the Republic.
9. Changes in the labour law and the gender pay gap in the public sphere (the part of the
Twenty-seven to thirty-sixth) also very little related to tax
changes. This concerns in particular the remuneration of professional soldiers, members of the
security forces, agents and representatives (constitutional regions, municipalities and
HL. m. Prahy). These changes require, for reasons of law and predictability
the democratic legitimacy of law-making, editing in a special law.
10. Even less legitimate are the changes in the labour code, which relate to the
the relationship between two private persons, i.e.. the employer and the
by the employee. Particularly excessive in this respect supplement the content
confirmation of employment pursuant to section 333 of the labour code in the twentieth
the seventh, article. XLI, point 7.
11. A number of the contested parts of the law got into it on the way
the amendments. It is a part of the twenty-second, no XXXV, 1 points,
2 and 12, part of the twenty-fourth, article. XXXVIII, points 1, 2, 3 and 5. For example.
the attempt to replace the legal adjustment periods of custody for the purposes of
pension insurance (as a result of the finding of the Constitutional Court No 405/2006
SB.) It is the right, but not the "sticking" of this new legal
modifications to the law that is the issue of counting the days for the purposes of
pension insurance at all. The appellants have pointed out, in particular, on the
Constitutional Court SP. zn. PL. ÚS 77/06, promulgated under no. 37/2007
Coll., paragraph 73).
The arguments of a group of 19 Senators of the Parliament of the Czech Republic
12. This group of plaintiffs stressed that his proposal does not question
compliance with the content of the contested act, the constitutional order, but only the
the way its approval, which it considers unconstitutional. In this
the context was highlighted, in particular, on the findings of the SP. zn. PL. ÚS 33/97
(A collection of decisions, Volume 9, finding no. 163, no. 30/1998
SB.), pl. ÚS 5/02 (collection of decisions, Volume 28, find no 117, declared
under no 476/2002 Coll.), pl. ÚS 77/06 (promulgated under no. 37/2007 Sb.).
The problem with this law he sees that this is a package of the many amendments to the
the laws in one Act, thereby reducing its clarity. In
second reading mp and Prime Minister Topolánek presented very M.
a comprehensive amendment, which brought in many parts of that Act
side "poor". The proposal of the Group of 19 Senators of the derogation in its
small print does not include any of those parts of the said Act, which is
the subject of this proceeding.
The arguments of a group of 43 members of Parliament of the Czech Republic
13. the proposal also included a group of 43 members (as in the case of
the design group 69 members) request to cancel the entire Bill No.
261/2007 Coll., for no constitutional defects in the legislative process.
The argument for this group of claimants is largely the same as the
the arguments of a group of 67 members. The law regarded as partial file
adjustments, representing both the amendment of laws, on the one hand
editing, which would have stood as a separate laws. For the so-called. "poor"
consider changing the legislation of almost all social systems, etc.
14. proposal of this group of plaintiffs Petit contains a proposal for the abolition of the
part of the sixteenth of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., i.e.. part of the changing of the law No.
111/2006 Coll. on assistance in material need. Not agree with paragraphs 18 and 19,
whose purpose is to ensure that people receiving assistance in the
material need not self-employed for a period longer than 12 months,
when fixing the amount of the benefit was based only on the amount of existential
with minimums by increasing the amount of living on these persons apply
It will not be. From this edit to be strict at the same time excluded persons
older persons 55 years old, partially disabled and persons taking care of a child under the age of
12 years of age. Point 24 was then deleted existing section 31 of Act No. 111/2006 Coll.
narrowing the class of persons for which there is an increase of the amount of living on the 600.0-
CZK during long remain in a State of physical distress.
15. According to the claimants as to the quality of the social safety net and the
the survival of the handicapped job seekers. Act No. 261/2007 Coll.
brings a fundamental systemic changes in this area just shortly after
entered into force law No 111/2006 Coll., consisting in the fact that the authorities of the
work and authorized the General authorities are withdrawn the competence to decide on the
the increase amounts to the livelihood of 600.0-per month for long term
unemployed at the stage of physical distress. The present adaptation was
replaced with an exhaustive, identifying persons, that of the law on the increase of the mentioned
reach and the law so the quality of life of the bodies concerned shall be inserted into the
subjective decision-making officials. The promoters will see a serious problem in
that group of people that will be dismantling the increased amount for living
about 600.0-KC is not complete, because the law does not remember for example. to the Group
job seekers aged over 50 years. In addition to disability, therefore,
should have the automatic increase in the living of 600.0 CZK and long term
the unemployed "drunks" in a State of physical distress.
16. in principle, being contrary to the purpose of the social safety net and
nabourávající solidarity between people, consider the new promoters
adjustment of § 39, paragraph. 2 (a). and the law on employment), which proposes
bind the granting of unemployment benefits on your own responsibility
employees retain their employment. This is the intervention of the State
the relationship between the employer and the employed. The Act amended the conditions
unemployment insurance, the premium rate preserves, but the scope of the
indemnity narrows only to cases of unemployment
organizational reasons or in cases of termination of employment agreement
or the normal notice, filed by the employee. In the case of immediate
the cancellation of the employment relationship by the employer for violation of labour
obligations especially rough way or because of the Permanent
violation of the working discipline for six months to pay the insurance principle
and the employee has, although honestly paid a premium in the event of
unemployment insurance benefits received. The employer then gets into the
significant tool that fundamentally changes the balance of power on the market
work, cutting the work force and unilaterally toward
17. This group of plaintiffs also proposed to repeal part of the nineteenth
amending the law No. 54/1956 Coll., on sickness insurance
employees. The subject is the law, which was repealed by Act No.
187/2006 Coll., on sickness insurance, but its effectiveness is up from 1.
January 1, 2009. The said section 19 (paragraph 3 et seq.) brought about the postponement of the
provision of health, which will provide for the first
three calendar days of temporary incapacity or ordered
the quarantine. It cannot be accepted, because of the sickness insurance system
It is based on the insurance principle, which is intended to protect when
of the insured event, which in this case is the disease. This system was
set up better in the laws at the beginning of the last century. The provision of section
6 Act No 689/1920 Sb.. it was stated that, if the disease takes longer
three days, and if the ill unable to earnings, it belongs to him, from the date of
disease in the Act referred to daily sickness. New adjustment so there
to the violation of the rights of insured persons, and the sickness insurance system so only
He's covering the resources to cover the State budget deficit.
18. on point 10, the same part, changing the calculation of the daily assessment
the basis for the determination of health and aid in the treatment of a Member
the family, to the point of 14, decreasing the percentage for fixing the aid
while nursing a family member from 69% to 60%, i.e.. on the level of
the sickness to 30. the calendar day of the incapacity, to the point of 17,
blocking the indexation of amounts laid down for the application of the reduction
borders when calculating the daily assessment base from which shall be
the amount of cash benefits sickness insurance and items 19 and 20 of this
the Group of plaintiffs have stated that this adjustment will mean a reduction
the level of security of the employees, who are as a result of the transitional
incapacity to rely on sickness benefits. At the same time
weakens the insurance principle of the sickness insurance scheme. Impacts can
significantly reflected in the deterioration of the health status of the population moving and
zatajováním diseases, including infectious.
19. This group of plaintiffs and the repeal of parts of the proposed twenty-first,
changing the law No. 88/1968 Coll. in points 4 and 6, which are cancelled
the provision of maternity lonely women, and in recitals 7 to
9, cancellation shall be entitled to financial assistance in maternity benefits for applicants
employment. A major impact of all these adjustments is that the low-income
groups of the population, they get into a situation where they will have a limited
access to public services and to medical treatment, which will cover
in particular, families with more children, where a woman on maternity leave.
New edit so withdrawing the assistance to the people, which the State is obliged to
provide adequate material support, because they can't do it.
This is denied by a respect for human rights, guaranteed in the preamble to the Constitution
Of the CZECH REPUBLIC. The law has also been disowned by the principles of protecting legitimate expectations
the claim, which has already been granted to the legal act and is sufficiently
personalised on the basis of legislation. In this context, the
the appellants referred to the findings of the SP. zn. PL. ÚS 50/04 (collection
the decision, volume 40, finding no 05, declared under no 154/2006 Sb.) and (IV).
TC 167/05 (a collection of decisions, Volume 37, finding no. 94). When any
change of control of the legislature must take into account the current legal status and
the changes carried out sensitively and to the extent necessary for the achievement of the objectives of the
20. According to this group of plaintiffs, also in violation of the article. 14
Convention for the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms as amended by protocols
No. 3, 5 and 8 (communication from the MINISTRY of FOREIGN AFFAIRS No. 209/1992 Coll.), which expressly provides that the
the use of the rights and freedoms recognised in this Convention shall be ensured without
discrimination based on any grounds.
Representation of the parties
21. The Constitutional Court pursuant to the provisions of § 42 paragraph. 4 and section 69 of the Act on the constitutional
the Court posted the present proposal to repeal the contested provisions
The Chamber of Deputies and the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic.
Representation of the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic
22. The Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic in its representation of the
30 March. 11.2007, signed by its Chairman Ing. Miloslav Vlčkem,
zrekapitulovala objection of plaintiffs and expressed disagreement with them.
Expression does not contain any specific opinion on matters that are
the subject of the proceedings in this matter and the conclusion that the House
the Chamber of Deputies acted in the belief that the law is adopted in accordance with the Constitution
The CZECH REPUBLIC, the constitutional order and the rule of law.
Representation of the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic
23. The Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, represented by Chairman MUDr.
Přemysl Sobotka, in representation of 28 June. 11.2007, he described, in particular,
the assessment procedure Act No. 261/2007 Coll., by the Senate. In its plenary session
was not "classical" debate in accordance with the rules of procedure of the Senate. Before
a vote on the proposal to the Senate Bill, some
officials of the Senate, and the Chairmen of the clubs have taken advantage of their rights.
preferential granting of words (section 69 of the law on the rules of procedure of the Senate). The Senate
by resolution No. 192, of 19 December. 9.2007, the majority approved the proposal,
expressing the will of the draft law is to dwell, acted in the belief that
This standard is in accordance with the Constitution and the Charter. Although the law ".
at first glance it may resemble the unrelated file
separate partial legislation compiled only into one
a comprehensive law
contains the main unifying idea ... the stabilization of public budgets
“. The analogous procedure is not a novelty in the Czech legislative process, the
as well, it was followed also for example. When setting up regions (Law No.
132/2000 Sb.) or when stopping the activities of the district offices (Law No.
320/2002 Coll.). Through the prism of unifying ideas of the Bill the Senate accepted
even complex amendments (members of Topolánek, Tluchoře and Rovana)
adopted by the Chamber of Deputies. In conclusion, the Board noted that it is on
The Constitutional Court to assess the constitutionality of the adopted law and with the final
A replica of the petitioners to express
24. The appellants-a group of 67 members-posted 18 May. 12.2007
the observations of the President of the Chamber of Deputies and the President of the Senate of its
contradicting the replica. Its essence was the finding that participants
proceedings before the Constitutional Court are the Chambers of the Parliament, not their
the Presidents. You represent the Chamber and are not entitled to
separately to form her will. Only this will, created by
the rules laid down by the Constitution and the law, to communicate or to manifest.
If the President does not submit a proposal to the Parliament Chamber representation as
the party for approval to the Chamber, the Constitutional Court, by virtue of
their functions, just the circumstances of fact and the uncontested hearing
the draft law.
A description of the legislative procedures, the adoption of Act No. 261/2007 Coll.
25. From the observations of both chambers of the Czech Parliament, are connected
the annexes and documents available electronically in a digital
the library on the Web site of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate of the Parliament
The Czech Republic on www.psp.cz and www.senat.cz, the Constitutional Court found that the
The Government of the CZECH REPUBLIC submitted to the Chamber of Deputies the Government Bill on 24. 5.
2007 (222/0). The Bill has been circulated to members April 25. 5.2007.
The Organising Committee of the Chamber of Deputies discussing the draft law
recommended 24 October. 5.2007. Determine the newsletter Mgr. Bohuslav Sobotku and
suggested order proposal to discuss the three committees: 1. the Committee for the
health, 2. the Committee for social policy, 3. the Budget Committee.
The first reading took place in 6 days. and 7. on 15 June 2007. the meeting of the
The Chamber of Deputies. The Bill was referred to the consideration of the above committees
(resolution No. 335). The House Committee on health to discuss proposal
the law of 20 March. June 2007, did not accept any resolution. The Committee for social
policy to discuss the Bill of the day 2. 7. in 2007, and in its resolution
recommended the proposal be rejected. The Committee discussed the draft law day
8.8. 2007, and in its resolution recommended to reject the proposal.
26. The second reading in the House of Commons passed the Bill in the General and detailed
the debate on 14 July. and 15. on 18 August 2007. meeting. Filed amendments
the proposals were processed as print 222/3, which was sent to 16. 8.2007.
Third reading in the House of Commons was 21. 8.2007 at 18. meeting. A proposal from the
the law was approved, from the present 200 members of Parliament voted for the adoption of
101 members, 99 votes against. The Chamber of Deputies referred the day
31.8. 2007 Senate Bill as print 106/0. The Senate has included print on
its 8. meeting and discuss it on 19 December. 9.2007. Senate resolution No. 192
expressed its willingness to act is to dwell on design. The law was delivered to the
the President of the Republic on 25. 9.2007, the President signed it on 5 December.
10.2007 and the law was declared 16 June. 10.2007 in the collection of laws in
the amount under the number 85 261/2007 Coll.
Oral proceedings before the Constitutional Court
27. during the oral proceedings the Constitutional Court plenum, held on 23 December 2005. April
2008, representatives of the plaintiffs essentially reiterated the arguments already
officials said the proposals to repeal the contested legislation. Other parties to the
control briefly left on their terms, which the Constitutional Court
reviews are written by. The Design Of JUDr. V. Philip additional evidence svědeckým
the interrogation of a member of Louis Hovorky of the circumstances of coercion on the Member
When discussing the above-mentioned bill in the Chamber of Deputies plenary
The Constitutional Court met with reference to article 26 of the Constitution of the Czech
of the Republic.
Constitutional competence and conformity of the legislative process
28. Pursuant to section 68, paragraph. 2 Act No. 182/1993 Coll., the Constitutional Court, in the context of the
control of inspection standards, reviewing the compliance of the law with the constitutional order
of three basic aspects. The first is the competence of the authority that the contested
the law, the second is the procedure which the Act was issued, and the third is the
its own content, IE. its content for compliance with the constitutional order. By
It is, therefore, given the logical sequence of the review. In assessing the constitutionality of
the contested act, the Constitutional Court accepted the plea
the petitioner, under which the Presidents of the Chambers of the Parliament are not allowed to
separately form the will of the Chamber. In its comments, of the participant's position
the proceedings are entitled to communicate on behalf of the competent Chamber of the Constitutional Court
just factual and undeniable circumstances, consideration of the draft law. Guest
the contested act and the controversy with a proposal for the repeal of the Constitutional Court
above this limit is already the expression of a personal opinion of the Chamber, but its
of the President.
29. The subject of the review of constitutionality in the matter is above umpired marked
parts of the Act on the stabilization of public budgets no. 261/2007 Coll.
Competence of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, which has adopted these laws, and
the constitutionality of the procedure, the adoption of Act No. 261/2007 Coll. solved find sp.
Zn. PL. ÚS 24/07 of 31 May. 1.2008.
30. The proposal to repeal the individual parts of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., which
is the subject of the proceeding is based first and foremost on the objections, the incident
on the constitutionality of the adoption of the hardened violation of the law as a whole.
Here again to refer to the conclusions of the award sp.. PL. ÚS 24/07. The same thing
can be applied to procedural misconduct relating to individual
parts of the aforementioned Act on the stabilization of public budgets, which are
the applicant and the interveners seen in the absence of a close relationship
with the subject of proposed amendments to the Act and in exceeding the
the legal framework for the submission of legislative proposals in the third technical
reading in its adoption.
The opposition law discrepancies
31. As was stated in the award SP. zn. PL. ÚS 24/07, is law No.
261/2007 Coll. on the stabilization of public budgets, in terms of legislative
technical, law by the joint. Contains both the amendment exactly marked
acts (part 1, to 36, 38 to 44, 48 and 50), on the original new legal
adjustment (section 37, 45, 46, 47), and finally the cancellation provisions (part 51)
and the provisions on the effectiveness (part 52). In other words, it is a
the law, which is partly a "waste amendment" and in part a new legal
by editing. Thus, as is clear from the already cited finding SP. zn. PL. ÚS 24/07,
the adjustment of the social system, carried out by Act No. 261/2007 Coll.
the stabilization of public budgets, has content linked to the area of public
budgets. This is not, therefore, by the Parliament of the CZECH REPUBLIC, about the extreme
the system, which was based arbitrariness in relation to this part of the derogation
the reason for the violation of the principles of the rule of law and parliamentary material
The absence of a close relation to the opposition of the amendments with the subject
the law and exceeded the statutory framework for the administration of
legislatively-technical proposals in the third reading of the draft law
32. in relation to the following provisions of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll.
the plaintiffs argue the absence of a close relationship with the amendments
the content of the draft law itself at the top marked parts. And these questions
can be considered resolved finding of 31 May. 1.2008, SP. zn. Pl. ÚS
Content compliance of the contested statutory provisions with constitutional order
33. The Constitutional Court in its established case-law stated that the amendment
the law does not have a separate existence of normative, but becomes
part of the revised legislation (find SP. zn. PL-5/96
(A collection of decisions, volume 6, find no 98, promulgated under Act No. 286/1996
SB.), resolution SP. zn. PL. ÚS 24/2000 (a collection of decisions, volume 19,
the USN. No. 27), the findings of the SP. zn. PL. TC 21/01 (a collection of decisions, volume 25,
find no 14, no. 95/2002 Coll.), pl. TC 33/01 (collection
the decision, volume 25, finding no. 28, declared under no 145/2002 Coll.)), and
as such, its constitutionality is assessed. If they are in control of inspection
the reasons for the absence of regulatory standards, derogačními, respectively.
constitutionally prescribed way of the adoption of the law, is then
considered the constitutionality of the amendment (see findings SP. zn. PL. ÚS 5/02
(see above), pl. ÚS 7/03 (collection of decisions, volume 34, finding no 113,
promulgated under no. 512/2004 Sb.)).
34. The Constitutional Court has repeatedly stressed that, when assessing the violation of the law,
eventually. its individual provisions, with the constitutional order is bound only
petitem, and not his reasoning (find SP. zn. PL. ÚS 16/93 (collection
the decision, volume 1, finding no. 25, promulgated under no. 131/1994 Coll.) and
For more). Oppose-if the applicant against content-related non-compliance of the law with
the constitutional order, then for the purposes of constitutional review is not sufficient only
mark law (or its individual provisions), proposed for cancellation,
but it is necessary to indicate the reason the alleged unconstitutionality. If it is shared
the applicant in the proceedings for the control of standards of burden of the claim of unconstitutionality,
such a proposal could not be considered for before the contradictory with the provisions of § 34 paragraph. 1
the law on the Constitutional Court, and thus incapable of the Litigation discussion (see
find SP. zn. PL. ÚS 7/03-see above). The implications of that conclusion
on the part of the small print, in which a group of 67 MPs seeks
the cancellation of the fifteenth through twenty-second, twenty-fourth to thirty-
part of the forty-ninth and fourth Act. In addition to the objections of procedural
not to these parts of the Act, on the part of this group of plaintiffs
(IE. groups 67 members), no content (material).
35. Only a group of 43 members of Parliament of the Czech Republic (side
a participant in this case), in the small print has proposed the abolition of certain parts of the Act
and in this way has brought a number of arguments-see paragraph III./c from the top.
This means that the Constitutional Court could deal with only those parts of the meritorně
the Bill, which proposed to cancel just this group of plaintiffs.
36. In the interest of the whole thing can be said that the subject of the proceedings,
as defined by the proposal of a group of members at the top 67 cancellation marked parts
Act No. 261/2007 Coll., relates to the following areas, which can be
divided into 4 groups:
Changes in the conditions and the claim and the amount of some of the benefits of social
B. related changes and additions to the definition of some concepts and categories
C. competent authorities Competency changes and changes in the management of
social security and sickness insurance
D. related technical amendments and adjustments
Changes in some portions of social security, in the way of their
the determination of the conditions of entitlement to these benefits.
Act No. 261/2007 Coll. has brought changes in the following areas:
In the area of State social support benefits
(Amendment of the Act No. 117/1995 Coll., on State social assistance, article. XXIII
Act No. 261/2007 Coll.-part fifteen) to change the criteria when
the determination of certain types of income, of which determines the so-called. the decisive income
for the award of benefits provided depending on the level of income; further
following the abolition of the allowance on school supplies and to changes in the conditions of
the claim, the way of setting and reduce the child, social
the supplement, parental allowance, the allowance when taking the child to the
foster care, the birth grant and a death grant (points 1-12, 14-19).
For assistance in material need benefits
(Amendment of Act No 111/2006 Coll. on assistance in material need. XXV of Act
No. 261/2007 Coll.-part XVI) was newly established amount of living for
persons who are not employed or otherwise employed continuously throughout the
For more than 12 months, the amount of subsistence with the fact that these
persons who do not belong to the increase in the amount of living according to § 25-section 30 of Act No.
111/2006 Coll. are excluded from this provision, persons who have reached the age of
at least 55 years of age, a person with a disability under section 67, paragraph. 2 (a).
(b)) to the Employment Act, or the parents of the person taking care of a child at the age of
up to 12 years (point 18 and 19). Act No. 261/2007 Coll. was repealed section 31 of the Act
on assistance in material need, maintaining the possibility of increasing the amount of
living in the long stay in a State of physical distress. It was the
the amount of CZK 600.0 in the case of a person who is under the representation of the Office work of the person,
that requires increased care in mediation of employment, after a year of
continuous leadership in the registration of candidates and the current receipt
contribution to the living (paragraph 24). The new legislation was to modify the
the conditions of entitlement to the supplement to the housing and to the new specification
reasonable housing costs (paragraphs 25 and 30).
39. In the area of provision of
of social services
(Amendment of Act No. 108/2006 Coll., on social services. ARTICLE XXVIII of the Act
No. 261/2007 Coll.-part eighteen) was cancelled, title III, the Governing
increasing contribution to the care provided to persons dependent on help
other natural persons, in order to ensure the necessary assistance, regulation
Government (point 1). A new edit has changed some of the conditions for
the payment of this allowance (paragraph 4), changing for some types of the social
services provided without reimbursement, changes in the amount of the remuneration for the accommodation and
diet in some social service establishments (point 24, 27, 29 and 32) and
to cancel the title X, which modified the assessment burden neodůvodnitelné
in cases where the system for aid on the basis of the law on
social services asked, under the specified conditions, a citizen of the Member
State of the European Union (point 20).
40. for the provision of
(Amendment of the Act No. 88/1968 Coll., on the extension of maternity leave, the
maternity benefits and allowances for children from sickness insurance,
article. XXXIII of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll.-part of the twenty-first),
repeal the provision of maternity and after the exhaustion of the law
period in the case of single women (point 4). It was also cancelled
the provision of maternity to the citizens, who are led in
the registration of job seekers (point 7).
In the field of sickness insurance of employees
(Law No. 54/1956 Coll., on sickness insurance of employees. XXIX
Act No. 261/2007 Coll.-Part 19), mainly to the change in
provision of health, which, according to the new legislation belongs to
in the case of employees, if the incapacity lasts more than three
days ago. Sick leave shall be granted as from the fourth day of the working
the inability, in contrast to the previous law, which recognize
the provision of sickness from the first calendar day of the working
the inability of the. The same adjustment applies quarantine ordered under the Special
the law (section 3-6). Act No. 261/2007 Coll. newly edited by the amount of
sickness, so that the original edit of the above sickness, which
the rate was 69% per calendar day of the daily assessment base that
the first three days of the incapacity or the quarantine was 25% of the daily
the assessment base, provides a different level of sickness,
tiered according to the duration of the incapacity or the quarantine.
The amount of sickness per calendar day as the newly makes 60% of the daily
the assessment base to 30. the calendar day of the incapacity or
quarantine, 66% from 31. 60. the calendar day and 72% from 61.
the calendar day of the incapacity or quarantine (point 7).
42. Another change concerns the adjustment of the amounts in the calculation of the daily assessment
the basis for the determination of health and aid in the treatment of a Member
the family (paragraph 10). There was also a change in the provision of health
poživatelům retirement or full invalidity pension, which, according to the
the new legislation provides for 81 days (instead of
the original 84 calendar days-item 12). This sickness is poživatelům
retirement or full invalidity pension provides maximum date
which ends the employment (point 13). Act No. 261/2007 Coll. decreased the amount of
aid in the care of a family member on 60% of the daily rate
basis per calendar day (instead of the original 69%-point 14) and this
support does not belong. the withdrawal period after the termination of employment (point 18).
New legislation in General, the withdrawal period shortened from 42 to 7 days from the
termination of employment (paragraph 19).
43. For this new adjustment of the sickness insurance of employees follow
analogous changes in health care as in other legislation,
made by Act No. 261/2007 Coll. with regard to amendments in the law No 32/1957 Coll.
medical care in the armed forces (article. XXXI-part twenty)-IE.
the shortening of the withdrawal period, shortening the period of provision of health
members of the security forces, who are beneficiaries of old-age
or full invalidity pension adjustment amount of sickness,
the Act No. 88/1968 Coll., on the extension of maternity leave, to benefits in
motherhood and the welfare of the children from sickness insurance (article. XXXIII-
part twenty-first)-determination of the daily assessment base for
compensatory allowance in pregnancy and maternity benefits under the Act on
sickness insurance and in the Act No 155/1995 Coll., on pension
insurance (article. XXXVIII-part of the twenty-fourth)-new legislation in receipt
health insurance benefits (care) at the time of temporary work
incapacity or quarantine (point 8).
44. Furthermore, it is all about the change of Act No. 187/2006 Coll., on sickness
insurance (article. XXXIX-part twenty-five), in which the same
changes in the amount of the sickness and the shortening of the withdrawal period as in Act No.
54/1956 Coll. (point 3 and point 9). Act No. 261/2007 Coll. was established
change the amounts applicable for the purposes of receipt of sickness insurance,
the original 1-2 500.0 Czk-0.0 Czk (point 1), change the calculation of the aggregate
bases for insurance premiums (point 4), changing daily
the assessment base for the calculation of sickness and ošetřovného and cash
help in motherhood and the compensatory allowance in pregnancy (paragraph 5) and
change the above 65% ošetřovného of the daily assessment base on 60% (point
45. In connection with the changes in the system of health insurance was
also changes in the law no 262/2006 Coll., i.e.. the labour code (article. XLI-
part of the twenty-seventh), concerning the adjustment of the refund wage or salary
temporarily unable to work of the employee or of the employee, which was
ordered quarantine, so this substitution for the first three days, distributor
temporary incapacity or quarantine (point 3). Compensation for the loss
earnings for the period of inability to work before the damage caused by the
an accident at work or occupational diseases is the responsibility of staff and at the time of
the first three calendar days of incapacity (point 8). New was
refund wages or salary in the amount of 60% of average earnings,
While for the purposes of wage or salary compensation, found the average earnings
edits in the same way that regulates the daily assessment base
for the calculation of the sickness of the sickness insurance scheme that is
appropriate reduction of the border, provided for the purposes of sickness insurance,
multiplied by a coefficient of 0.175 (point 4).
46. The related changes to the salary or other remuneration are Act No. 261/2007
SB. made in Act No. 221/1999 Coll., on the soldiers of the occupation (article. XLII.
-part of the twenty-eighth), law No. 361/2003 Coll., on the service
members of the security forces (article. XLIV-part of the twenty-ninth)
Act No 236/1995 Coll., on salary and other terms associated with the
the performance of the functions of State power and some of the representatives of State authorities and
the courts and members of the European Parliament (article. XLVI-part of the 1930s),
Act No. 201/1997 Coll., on salary and some other aspects of the
prosecutors (article. XLIX-part thirty-first), in Act No. 128/2000
Coll., on municipalities (municipal establishment), (article. LII-part thirty-second), in
Act No. 129/2000 Coll., on the regions (regional establishment), (article. LIV-part
thirty-third), law no 131/2000 Coll., on the capital city of Prague (article.
LIONS-part of the thirty-fourth), and in Act No. 218/2002 Coll., on the service
State employees in administrative offices and on the remuneration of these
employees and other employees in administrative offices (business
the law (article). LVIII-part of the thirty-fifth). In determining the salary and some
expenses for representatives of State power and some State authorities and
in determining the salary of the judges and prosecutors in appropriate laws
accompanied by extraordinary measures, which is based on the salary base
of formal to 31. December 2007 (2008-2010), (article.
XLVIII-part thirty-and article. IF-part thirty-first).
47. on the basis of Act No. 261/2007 Coll. has changed Act No. 435/2004
Coll. on employment (article. LIX-part XXXVI). According to the new legislation
entitlement to unemployment benefit does not have a job-seeker, and)
which was, at the time of the last 6 months before inclusion into the register
applicants for the job, the employer terminated the employment relationship
for violation of the obligations arising from legislation,
relating to the work performed by a particularly gross manner (point 3).
Further limiting the contribution to support the employment of people with
disabilities and the determination of the maximum amount (point 6).
48. Act No. 261/2007 Coll. has been modified to change the bases
for the payment of the premium and for the setting of maximum bases
premium payments (Amendment of Act No. 589/1992 Coll., on insurance on
social security and the contribution to the State employment policy, article.
XXXVI. Act No. 261/2007 Coll.-part of the twenty-third).
49. The new edit was deleted post on the increased cost of living,
provided by Decree No. 182/1991 Coll., implementing the law on the
social security and the law of the Czech National Council on the scope of the authorities
The Czech Republic in social security, as amended
(article. LXI-part of the thirty-seventh).
50. The adjustment of the scholarships referred to in Act No. 111/1998 Coll., on high
schools and amending and supplementing other acts (the Act on universities).
The change concerns the calculation of the scholarships, student in přiznávaného
the case of a difficult social situation, who is eligible for child benefit
(article. LXIII-part thirty-ninth).
51. On the basis of the amendments to the Act No. 127/2005 Coll., on electronic
roads and amending certain related laws (the law on the
electronic communications), was limited to the obligation of entrepreneurs,
providing a publicly available telephone service, to enable the selection of prizes
or pricing plans, which differ from the normal price plans
commercial conditions, to persons with disabilities, unlike
an earlier edit, which concerned persons with low income and special
social needs (article. LXX-part of the forty-fourth).
Constitutional changes included in the evaluation of the Group and
52. most of the changes made to the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., relates to the rights,
belonging between the social rights. Their conceptual character is the fact
they do not have an unconditional nature and it is possible for them to pursue only
the limits of the law (article 41, paragraph 1, of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms-on
"the Charter"). This provision gives the jurisdiction to determine the lawmakers
specific conditions for the realisation of social rights. Legal implementation shall not
be contrary to constitutional principles, in other words, the relevant laws
constitutionally guaranteed social rights must not deny or cancel. In the implementation of
the constitutional modifications, enshrined in the Charter, the legislature must follow the article. 4
paragraph. 4 of the Charter, according to which when using the provisions on the limits of the
fundamental rights and freedoms must be investigated, the nature and the meaning of them. U
social rights can be stated, that the summary is just
the fact that they are not, for example. from the fundamental rights and freedoms,
directly enforceable on the basis of the Charter. Their scarcity is
the need for legal implementation, that is, of course, at the same time condition
the specific implementation of each of the rights.
53. These facts relate to the specific character of the social
the rights, which are particularly dependent on the economic situation of the State. The level of
the provision reflects not only the economic and social development of the State
but the relationship of the State and the citizen, based on mutual responsibility and
recognition of the principle of solidarity. The degree to which the principle of accountability and
solidarity manifested in the legal order of the State, it also specifies the character
This State (e.g. as a social State). The rate of recognition of the principle of
solidarity depends on the level of ethical understanding of coexistence in society,
its culture, but also the meaning of the individual for the justice and
Fellowship with others and sharing their fate at a particular time, and
the spot. Solidarity can be seen as an internal point of view of the individual or
the outer. Internal solidarity is given emotional proximity of relationship to others
It is spontaneous, especially in the family and in other partner
communities. The State does not interfere in this relationship generally, or just
very limited (see the family legal relations of the modified law of
the family). External solidarity this emotional closeness, and lacks the consent
individuals with its application is therefore zdráhavější. It is on the
an example of the solidarity of the rich with the poor, gifted with less capable,
healthy with sick. The State is in this area of your
power-vrchnostenskou functions very actively. Through the principle of solidarity
redistribution takes place, i.e.. transmitting movement from some source
to others-to those in need. Solidarity has its limits. Can't have enough
within the form to it, that affects, felt as
excessive, disproportionate or even unfair and they had cut off her
your tacit consent. In the name of solidarity, a State may penalize only
such part of the property, to his activity at the nedestruoval
performance and for the constitutional protection of the property boundary.
54. In the implementation of social rights from the State, therefore, requires not only
their recognition, but also its specific activity that will allow the implementation of the
These rights. The implementation is provided in the framework of social rights come from
the State budget and responsibility for the implementation rests entirely on the side of the
State. If this is the State, which is and will be bound by social transactions, then also
must be able to lay down the specific conditions of such implementation. The State's
can't afford the irresponsibility to become a debtor which is not
Unable to comply with its obligations. These facts but should not deny itself
the existence of a particular social rights, and ultimately exclude
its realization. Within these limits the legislature has fairly wide
the ability to edit individual social rights, including the possibility of
55. In this spirit, indeed, talks and report to the Charter of fundamental rights and
freedoms (made at the 11th joint meeting of the House of the people and of the House of
the peoples of 8 June 2004. January 1991). It notes that: "
While the rights and freedoms provided in the previous heads have the nature
absolute and as such are protected by the Constitution, the rights of this title are
mostly relative, in the sense that their development-and this applies
all about economic and social rights-is dependent on the State of
the national economy and especially on its tangible results. Therefore,
the concept of these rights while also adheres to the basic principles of their
enforceability of the way judicial protection, however, for social rights in a
most are not the Constitutional Act made the conditions from which the ordinary
the law should be based on. Customizing the standard lower grade cannot
from their changes under the economic development and the standard of living, so
tie an ordinary legislator constitutional barriers would not be on the spot
56. The above described specific character of social rights in any way
does not mean that the legislature was not bound by them. The anchoring of their
the existence of the Charter means that, when legislation must be maintained
a certain minimum standard of social rights. In any case,
There must be an effective denial of social rights, because
It is also necessary to comply with the principles laid down in the Charter. The degree of their
compliance is to be assessed in each individual case, the implementation of the
These legal rights. The new legislation, which brought
the contested act is to be judged from this perspective, i.e.. from
in terms of the intensity with which eventually intervened in individual
social rights, guaranteed by the constitutional order, and that this intensity
achieves unconstitutional dimension.
57. the amendments made to the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., as described in the above marked
area concern mainly the rights covered by the title of the fourth Instrument,
entitled "economic, social and cultural rights". In the case of article 26 of the Charter of
in particular, paragraph 3, which provides that "everyone has the right
raise funds for your life needs work. Citizens, that this
the right to perform without their guilt, State in a reasonable range of substantive
provides; the conditions laid down by law. "the article 29 of the Charter formulates the right
women, minors and disabled persons at increased protection
health at work and the right of these two categories of persons to special protection
in labour relations. Article 30 of the Charter regulates the right of citizens to
adequate material security in old age and incapacity to work, and
everyone's right to such assistance in material need, which is necessary for the
provision of basic living conditions.
58. The protection of parenthood and family, which includes another group of amendments,
governed by article 32 of the Charter. Referred to in paragraph 1 is the protection of parenthood and
the family under the protection of the law and the special protection of children and adolescents is
guaranteed. In accordance with paragraph 5 of the parents who care for children, have the right to
assistance from the State. This article, as well as the above cited articles 26, 29 and
30 of the Charter refers to the implementation of these provisions of the law.
59. In terms of specific constitutional law can therefore be stated that the
The Charter left the lawmakers not only to design and specify the conditions above
referred to constitutional rights, but at the same time identified the realization of these rights
already in the constitutional text by the terms "
a reasonable range
necessary to ensure the basic living conditions of the
adequate physical security
", etc. Considering that the Charter does not specify the contents of the closer
terms, it is clear that their definition is, as well as the determination of the
further details left to the legislation.
60. In the areas covered by the articles of the Charter falls within the stated above and
proposal for a group of 43 members of the Chamber of Deputies. In the opinion of the constitutional
the Court arguments are contained in this proposal mainly on the nature of the social,
rather than constitutional law. There is no doubt that the Charter commits, in the area of
social rights, state the positive behaviour and to ensure the protection of
These rights. The content of this obligation of the State is to ensure that these bodies
the rights of certain minimum social standard, and not to an adequate standard of living
standard, in accordance with their requests, as these bodies sometimes
wrongly perceived and required.
61. With regard to the proposal from the Group of 43 members of Parliament on the abolition of the new edit section 39
paragraph. 2 (a). and) of Act No. 435/2004 Coll., on employment, "
proposes to bind the granting of unemployment benefits on your own responsibility
keep your employee's employment
"(see the reasoning in paragraph 16. from the top), this amendment, in the opinion of
The Constitutional Court, in itself does not add anything protiústavního. Only increases the
the liability of workers for their own conduct in labour relations,
because the "majority" who: "
violated the obligations arising from legislation relating to the
it performed work particularly rough way
“. This is a trend to increase discipline and to people's
work respected. In addition, each of the termination of the work relationship from the
the reason can be examined in a court in proceedings under section 72
Act No. 262/2006 Coll. (Labour Code) and thereby impede eventual
arbitrary acts of the employer. The trend, leading to increasing
responsibility for own conduct can only be welcome.
62. the proposal also includes a group of 43 members of Parliament request to cancel part of the
the nineteenth (point 3 et seq.), which brought a major substantive changes in the
the postponement provision of health, which will no longer be granted after
for the first three calendar days of temporary incapacity or
ordered by the quarantine. The proposal argues that the system of sickness
insurance is based on the insurance principle, which should serve to protect the
When the insured event, which in this case is the disease. This system was
set better and in the laws at the beginning of the last century. In section 6 (1). 2
Act No 689/1920 Sb.. it was stated that "
It takes longer if the disease three days, and if the ill unable to earnings,
to him, the date of disease in the Act referred to daily sickness
“. According to this group of plaintiffs, so there has been a violation of the rights of
policyholders and the sickness insurance system so only he's covering the resources to
cover the State budget deficit.
63. In the opinion of the Constitutional Court in this part of the proposal is reasonable because
repeal the provision of sickness for the first three days of incapacity
is in conflict with the provisions of the article. 30 paragraph. 1 of the Charter, in particular with the law
on the reasonable physical security when the incapacity to work. Change
the provisions of § 15 of paragraph 1. 1, 3, and section 16 of Act No. 54/1956 Coll., on sickness
insurance of the employees, as amended, the law removes all
employees in the incapacity or quarantine shall be entitled to sick leave
benefits for the first three days of incapacity or quarantine. This is
a somewhat comfortable to arbitrary procedure from the State, which due to the
an indefinite number of zneuživatelů of sickness benefits, the Board affects the
all categories of staff. The result is a situation in which the vast majority of
the staff remains, for the first three days of incapacity, without
any funds, while their obligation to pay the insurance
remained unaffected. Intact, of course, remained their obligation to
pay the so-called. regulatory charges, seek a medical advice. Is
inadmissible, to become the only required the fulfilment of the obligations of the parties
employees (in this case, the implementation of insurance premiums) and ignored while the protection
their interests will suffer if it is referred to the event in the form of the work
the inability of the. There has been a breach of the rights of the employees so that it achieves
constitutional dimension. The sickness insurance system should not serve
to cover the State budget deficit.
64. Since most of the common diseases is the short-term result may
be that the employees will be on his illness to draw (on vacation
leave!), which, however, is in stark contrast with its purpose. Another
the solution will usually be "illness" without doctor's visits and
inability to work. This will open the door to the spread of certain
disease among collaborators, and possible damage to
health in the future and to develop health complications as a result of untreated
the original disease. This can happen even to the considerable increase in the
the cost of treatment in case of complications, which can exceed the amount of the
sickness benefits, which could be or have been in the first three days
65. The disease is similar to insurance events, and its existence must be
proven accordingly (medical examination). Instead of the solution
in the form of the introduction of rigorous checks on doctors and the insured persons, the State transfers
the consequences of their unwillingness or inability to implement the controls on
the shoulders of the most honest employees. The same is true of the prescribed
quarantine, which is an objective reality for employees, in most
cases of disaster, the repercussions of an administrative decision. The decision on the
quarantine is a precautionary measures on the basis of sanitary
the legislation, for the fulfilment of the relevant conditions.
66. On the basis of the above arguments, the Constitutional Court upheld the proposal 43
members of the Chamber of deputies of the Czech Parliament and decided on the cancellation: the words "
If the incapacity lasts more than 3 calendar days
"in the provisions of section 15, paragraph. 1 the first sentence, Act No. 54/1956 Coll.
sickness insurance of employees. Also set aside the word "
"in section 15, paragraph. 3 the first sentence of the same law, and finally canceled the second sentence
the provisions of section 16 of the same law, as amended by: "
Sick leave pursuant to the first sentence is granted from the fourth calendar day
“. This legislation is in breach of article 30, paragraph. 1 of the Charter.
67. In this context, the Constitutional Court notes that the above change
in the payment of sickness benefits extends to a number of other laws,
listed in section 27 to 35 of the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., (starting from the
Labour Code), governing the entitlements listed the categories here
employees. Their cancellation, however, none of the plaintiffs has not proposed. According to the
steady legal conclusion, expressed in terms of finding SP. zn. PL. ÚS 15/01
(A collection of decisions, volume 24, finding no. 164, declared under no 424/2001
Coll.) the Constitutional Court is bound by the petitem of the design and of its borders basically
cannot move. Therefore, we can only appeal to the legislature to bound
the legal opinion of the Constitutional Court in the above-mentioned direction, said
the disparity in the payment of sickness benefits. Just because the constitutional
the Court postponed enforcement of the award to 30. 6.2008.
68. As regards the argument of the "legitimate expectations", which is also
included in the design of 43 members of the Chamber of Deputies, its application is not
in the area of social rights, completely in place. As already discussed above,
These rights are based, in particular, from the economic development and the standard of living,
the economy of the State. In relation to the State, which falls into
economic difficulties (see recently Russia, Argentina or Mexico),
everyone, even sebelegitimnější the claim becomes illusory and the injured are
basically everyone. This is related to the question of "
Once granted entitlements
"in the case of social rights cannot be taken as static. It
shows and the modern history of the Czech Republic, when left-leaning
Governments should tend to a variety of social benefits, while zmnožovat
pravicověji-oriented Governments tend to the opposite. But you must always
move the top already outlined the limits of the Charter. In terms of the
the overall compliance of the contested law with Constitutional law constitutional
the Tribunal notes that, despite the limitations in the field of social security
These restrictions do not attain such intensity that would be in contradiction with the
constitutional modification contained in the Charter, let alone that the implementation of the
the social rights concerned was negated.
Constitutional changes in ratings listed in Group (B)
69. The next group of the changes made to the Act No. 261/2007 Coll.,
include changes to the concepts and categories, and their related specifications
the content changes referred to under point I of these changes respond to a new
the legal adjustment to reflect the changes in the provision of benefits,
involves the calculation of benefits and added or adjusted, some new
categories of authorised persons. As for the changes, which follow on logically
content changes referred to in the group, and from the top, and thus. them the same
the conclusions of the group as at and.
Constitutional changes included in the evaluation group (C)
70. The Act No. 261/2007 Coll. on brings some competency and
organizational changes related to changes in the social system
Security and health insurance and changes in the management of the claims of the
benefits. It's all about editing and adding effects or the scope of the
some of the new institutions or facilities in the field of social security
(e.g. change in the District Social Security Administration on
pursuant to Act No. 582/1991 Coll., the Tween újezdních offices between the authorities
assistance in material need and aftercare facilities within the
social services), adding and editing some of the competencies
the competent authorities to address the issue of jurisdiction, the Tween expert
the eligibility to exercise the profession and to supplement the circuit staff
performing technical activities and volunteers in the field of social
71. Act No. 261/2007 Coll. also brought some changes in the management of
doses, for example. changes to the requirements in the request for some benefits, in
conditions of issuance of the written decision, the change of the deadlines, the possibility to submit
remedies in the doses, the new edit notification
obligations, legal representation and control the use of the relevant benefits,
including financial control used subsidies from the State budget on the
ensure the provision of social services and the issue of overpayments.
The essence of these changes is, again, following the adjustments described in
the Group and and covers mainly the field of procedural law of the social
Security. These adjustments are based on the content changes of individual
laws and do not conflict with the constitutionally guaranteed by the principles governing the
the conditions for the issuance of the decision of the public authorities.
Constitutional changes included in the evaluation group (D).
72. the last group of amendments, which introduces the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., are
related technical changes and modifications in the laws, such as the new
indication of legal provisions, the related changes to the notebook and
the new transitional provisions related to changes in the system of social
benefits and sickness insurance. According to the plaintiffs ' claim is a
arbitrariness in the legislature and by defining the legal terms, which
determined by the conflict with the principle of the rule of law because of the material
uncertainty and confusion.
73. In accordance with the conclusion of the Constitutional Court are by their very nature these changes changes
of a technical nature and is not in them, nothing that is pozvedávalo on the
constitutional level. It is not the role of the Constitutional Court that has evaluated the
technical changes and adjustments, which brings the current legislation. According to the
the established case law of the Constitutional Court, "
vagueness of a provision of the law is to be considered
rozpornou with the requirement of legal certainty and, therefore, the rule of law (article 1
paragraph. 1 of the Constitution), only if the intensity of this uncertainty
excludes the possibility of determination of its normative content using the usual
the interpretative practices
.“ (the findings of SP. zn. PL. ÚS 4/95 (collection, volume 3, decision, find no.
29 promulgated under no. 169/1995 Coll.), pl. ÚS 9/95 (collection of decisions,
Volume 5, finding no 16, declared under no 107/1996 Coll.), pl. ÚS 2/97
(Collection, volume 8, decision finding no 91, under no 186/1997
SB.), pl. ÚS 23/02 (collection of decisions, Volume 33, finding no. 89, declared
under no 476/2004 Coll.), pl. ÚS 40/02 (collection of decisions, volume 30, find
No 88, no. 199/2003 Coll.), pl. TC 44/02 (collection of decisions,
volume 30, finding no 98, promulgated under Act No. 210/2003 Coll.), pl. ÚS 10/06
(promulgated under no. 163/2007 Coll.), pl. TC 25/06 (promulgated under no. 487/2006
SB.)). Such a situation in this matter.
The conclusion of the
74. In conclusion, it should be noted that legislation in the said
areas brought the Act No. 261/2007 Coll., on public finances, has far
to perfection. A disgruntled public response, which basically went out
and the plaintiffs, the natural response of entities, which "removes something,
amended, or is less clear. " The basic idea, which is referred
the law is justified, the reorganization of public budgets. This good idea
have been implemented only partially, in a manner which did not gain wide support
to the public. The law is mentioned in the parts which are the subject of this
management, built on a relatively wide area and limiting the variety of
social benefits. This, for most of the population sensitive area
Unfortunately did not bring neither a simplification of the system, nor its more intuitive, or
simplification of the rules for the granting of benefits and even coherent measures
against their abuse.
75. in addition, the State began with the savings from the bottom, IE. by limiting social benefits
quite a wide range of subjects. Started with the creation of efficient and
effective control mechanisms, which could bring savings by
that would prevent or sanction the abuse of these benefits. For example. in the area of
the benefits provided by sickness at all with a Vice for which has
Czech expression "
I call in sick
"IE. an expression that may not exist in another language. The assessment of the
whether someone is sick, of course, would not be in the hands of, for
whom it is convenient. In health care establishments and in practice
health insurance companies have not been established effective control mechanisms,
enabling the remove these ills such gradually.
76. the State did not begin with the savings for yourself, whether it is the current analysis
"governance" efficient, effective, and cost-effective, whether there is
waste of public funds. If the State began, at least partly,
First, he to some extent, a significant part of the population of
the need for and the effectiveness of the changes in the area of social benefits, which is
of course linked to the possibilities of the State budget, as pointed out above.
77. the State therefore chose the easiest way here again, but unfortunately only for
themselves, thus the idea of reform has made somewhat of an untrusted. However, even this
the reform effort can be welcomed and from this perspective it is then necessary to examine
the edit that brought the contested law. The task of the Constitutional Court is not
to assess accuracy, practicality, or sufficient sociálnost mentioned
reform of the procedures, but only on whether it is unconstitutional or editing
78. in addition to some dissatisfaction with the arrangements, which brought the law No.
261/2007 Coll., the proposals did not include (among the top of the design group
43 members of the Chamber of deputies of the Czech Parliament), apart from reservations to
how the adoption of the law, any other relevant constitutional law
the argument. Space to derogačnímu the intervention of the Constitutional Court would
only if it was found and proved that the new legislation
reduces the implementation of the constitutionally guaranteed standard social benefits to
the practical impossibility of implementation, or even to their generalised
the withdrawal. The proposal for such a line of argument brought 67 members and management
before the Constitutional Court was established, that the existing legislation
marked a significant retreat from those commitments of the State, which
in particular, in articles 26, paragraph. 3, 29, 30, 32 of the Charter, which
the circuit is this case. The decline of the various social benefits is
for a variety of subjects, but below the level that hinder
a modest existence of the bodies concerned. To assess the question of effectiveness,
the appropriateness of the legal and social justice in this area is
only the powers of the legislature, in which the activities of the Constitutional Court, in addition to
cases detected neústavnosti, cannot intervene. It is about
in essence, the political questions, where primarily falls and the whole area.
79. According to the article. 5 of the Constitution, the political system of the Czech Republic is based on the
free and voluntary formation of and free competition of political parties,
respecting basic democratic principles. Political decision
based on the will of the majority, expressed a free vote. Decision making
most shall ensure the protection of minorities (article 6 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC). The Constitutional Court therefore
concluded that if the plaintiffs, as representatives of the legislative power,
for that, by the contested legislation is inappropriate or producing
the negative consequences can seek a change in the political competition,
not in the framework of judicial control of the constitutionality, which by its nature must
to be confined to questions of constitutionally legal in nature. If you could perhaps
The Constitutional Court upheld the proposal, and the decider himself instead of the legislature,
would not only broke the top-cited provisions of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC, but in particular,
He made an unnecessary competition of political parties. Above all, their task is
in accordance with the mandate provided by their electorate and based on established
political priorities, to submit to the most appropriate ways of realization
the social rights enshrined in title the fourth Instrument. This, of course, always
in terms of the possibilities of the State budget, based on the results
the State, which also bear the political responsibility, and within the limits
the relevant articles of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms.
80. Of all of the above reasons, the Constitutional Court obliged, under section 70, paragraph. 1
Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court, the only proposal to repeal parts of the
Act No. 54/1956 Coll., on sickness insurance of employees, and that the words "
If the incapacity lasts more than 3 calendar days
"in the provisions of section 15, paragraph. 1 the first sentence, the word "canceled
"in section 15, paragraph. 3 the first sentence of the same law, and finally canceled the sentence
the other provisions of section 16 of the same law, as amended by: "
Sick leave pursuant to the first sentence is granted from the fourth calendar day
“. He did so with effect from 30.6.2008 for reasons referred to in point 67
from the top.
81. In the remaining parts of the proposal dismissed under section 70, paragraph. 2 of the law on
The Constitutional Court.
The President of the Constitutional Court:
JUDr. Rychetský in r.
Different opinions under section 14 of Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the Constitutional Court,
as amended, the judges took the decision of the Assembly, Jan
Musil, Pavel Rychetský and Elisabeth Wagner.