In The Matter Of The Application For Revocation Of Section 4 Of The Budget Destination Of The Taxes.

Original Language Title: ve věci návrhu na zrušení části § 4 z. o rozpočtovém určení daní

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now

Read the untranslated law here: https://portal.gov.cz/app/zakony/download?idBiblio=66346&nr=18~2F2008~20Sb.&ft=txt

18/2008 Sb.



FIND



The Constitutional Court



On behalf of the Republic of



The Constitutional Court ruled June 20. November 2007 in the plenary, consisting of the President of the

Pavel Rychetský and judges of Stanislav Duchoně, ass-bag, of Franz Vlasta

Formánkové, Vojena Güttlera, Paul Holländera, Ivana Janů, Vladimir

The Crust, Dagmar Lastovecké, Jiří Mucha, Jan Musil, Jiří Nykodýma,

Miloslava Excellent, Wagnerové and Michaela Židlické Of the things

the proposal of the Group of Senators of the Senate of the Czech Republic on the abolition

part of the provisions of section 4, paragraph 4. 2 Law No. 243/2000 Coll., on the budgetary

destination of the proceeds of certain taxes to the territorial entities and certain

public funds (the budget law specify the taxes), as amended

regulations and the repeal of annex 2 to this Act,



as follows:



Proposal to repeal part of the provisions of section 4, paragraph 4. 2 Law No. 243/2000 Coll., on the

financial destination of the proceeds of certain taxes to the territorial entities and

some of the public funds (the budget law specify the taxes), as amended by

Amendment No 483/2001 Coll., and the abolition of annex 2 to this Act, in

the text of Amendment No 483/2001 Coll., is rejected.



Justification



(I).



The definition of things and a recap of the proposal



1. The Constitutional Court was 29 April. June 28, 2006 the Group received a proposal from the

Senators of the Senate of the Czech Republic (hereinafter "the applicant" or

"the plaintiffs") on the repeal of the provisions of section 4, paragraph 4. 2 of law No.

243/2000 Coll., on income taxes, financial destination of some territorial

municipalities and some of the public funds (the law on financial

determine the taxes), as amended by Act No. 492/2000 Coll., Act No. 483/2001 Coll.

Act No 387/2004 Coll. and Act No. 1/2005 Coll. (hereinafter the "law on

financial destination taxes "), the words" and in the amount corresponding to the proportion of

times the population of the municipality according to the balance of the number of inhabitants of the Czech

the Republic of 1. January of the current year and size category coefficient

the village to the sum of the powers of all municipalities in the Czech Republic. The coefficients

size categories of municipalities are listed in annex 2 to this

the law ".



The appellant requested and the repeal of annex 2 to this Act.



2. in the introductory part of the appellant recounted the content and meaning of the law on

financial destination taxes, in particular in relation to the provisions, whose cancellation

It is designed. He stated that this law was part of a set of laws

taken in the context of the reform of the public administration. The law allocates

a significant part of the public finances, specifically sets out the share of public

budgets and some State funds, the yields of the value added tax,

excise duties, income tax, real estate tax and road tax.

The aim of the Act is, according to its explanatory memorandum to ensure fiscal

the adequacy of budgets of different levels of territorial self-governing units

and to ensure, together with other revenues, cover the minimum needs of the communities and

counties. The appellant stressed that accepts the legitimacy of the law as the

such challenges only the constitutionality of the infected parts.



3. Discrepancy of the contested provisions with constitutional order sees the projector in

their collision with the article. 1 and 4, of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms and article. 8

The Constitution of the Czech Republic (hereinafter "the Constitution". The impugned provisions are in

contrary to the constitutionally guaranteed principle of equality in rights. If you have a

According to the constitutional order be equal in the rights of individuals, the

undoubtedly this principle in their community, therefore on the territorial

the community of citizens, which are municipalities. The law, however, the "natural

the principle "according to which the larger municipalities have greater revenue with regard to

the greater the number of its inhabitants, distorts the "some kind of artificial

the coefficients that larger municipalities and smaller revenue multiplied by the reduced ". It is

also the essence of the claim, the constitutionality of the law. Equality in rights is

While a relative, "However, if the different bodies is not in a comparable

the situation is treated equally, there is a need to for it existed

objective and reasonable grounds. " To be doing so respect the principle

adequacy. The purpose of the Act is the liquidation of small akcelerování

municipalities, which is also expressed in the explanatory memorandum. It is not only about the attack on the

constitutionally guaranteed equality in rights, but also to the constitutionally guaranteed

Self-Government of territorial self-governing units and, in particular, on the very existence of the

smaller territorial self-governing units. This is violated and the article. 8 article. 100

paragraph. 1 and article. paragraph 101. 3 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC.



4. The legislation does not guarantee sufficient income to small municipalities to carry out

their functions and to ensure that their citizens living

conditions comparable with larger cities. This supports the unwanted migration

the population in large cities and rural vyklidňování. Another ineffective

phenomenon associated with planning law, is "artificial merging

municipalities ", whose sole purpose is to" procedure "to a higher coefficient, event.

Phantom (only registration) increase in the number of inhabitants. With this sharply

contrasts carve the funds in favor of regions, which is

only the number of inhabitants in the region. The purpose of the cancellation

the contested provision is provoking public debate and subsequent

the determination of the "minimum income of the municipality, i.e.. the legal guarantee of such

revenue, which would ensure the functioning of territorial self-government and the corresponding

the living conditions and the residents of major cities. "



5. In conclusion, the appellant requested a postponement of the enforceability of derogačního

the award.



II.



Recap the essential parts of the representation of the parties



6. The challenge of the Constitutional Court, pursuant to section 69 of the Act No. 182/1993 Coll., on the

The Constitutional Court, as amended (hereinafter the ' law on the Constitutional Court "),

representation of the Senate of the Parliament of the Czech Republic and the Chamber of Deputies

The Parliament of the Czech Republic, as parties to the proceedings.



7. the President of the Chamber of Deputies, Ing. Miloslav Vlček refused, for the

Chamber of deputies of the Czech Parliament, the complainant alleged

the unconstitutionality of the contested part of the law. Current adjustment is the result of

the comprehensive development of the legislation, which the proposal distorts. Additionally, in the

During discussions in the House were the coefficients for the smallest

the municipality increased. It is common ground that the responsible assessment of the entire system

financial destination of the proceeds of the taxes it is possible to evaluate the longer

the time period. This, however, the proposal made by the Constitutional Court at all

is sensitive. The legislature adopted the law in the belief that it is in the

accordance with the constitutional order of the CZECH REPUBLIC.



8. the Senate of the Parliament of the CZECH REPUBLIC to the President of the Senate proposal.

Přemysl Sobotka. Drew attention to the political debate, which in

The Senate during the debate about the law on budgetary determine taxes. Some

the senators have criticized as too he editing, others

stressed the benefits of the Act of the municipality from the regions without a strong

business entities. Some Senators have argued for similar

positions, which is based on the proposal, others warned of the need for political

the compromise. The argument, however, in the discussion of protiústavností of the law at all

response. In the opinion of the Senate, "it is a very complex issue, which

solution is the most consensual (political) issues that have

for the development of the company's significant consequences (social, demographic, etc.),

However, when deciding whether or not it is necessary to take into account the effectiveness of the

incurred by the tax funds, which is destined to be a necessary

the optimal degree of centralisation and concentration, or the allocation of resources, which

they are not unlimited. " The appellant's argument about the proportion of counties on the yield

some of the taxes is not accurate, because this is not just

According to the number of inhabitants of the region to the total population of the State, but also on the

the basis of other criteria (area of the region, the number of municipalities, the density of the road

the network, etc.).



9. The Constitutional Court also requested, under section 48, paragraph. 2 of the law on the constitutional

the Court, on the representation of the Union of towns and municipalities of the Czech Republic. He stated that the

the system of allocation of funds to municipalities on the basis of two

criteria, IE. population and size category of the village is not known

only in the Czech Republic, but also in other countries, for example. in Austria and

in the Slovak Republic. Or other foreign nepřerozdělují edit set

shares in taxes all municipalities as well, but used to do various other

the criteria (in addition to those known in the Czech law, e.g. the number of persons

of a certain age or altitude). The original draft of the law on financial

the determination of taxes should substantially reduce income, in particular, the smallest municipalities to 100

of the population. To do this, but, by adjusting the coefficient in the framework of the amendments,

avoid. In comparison with the previous edit was made, on the basis of

the existing law, to increase the income for approximately 78% of the municipalities, in contrast, for the remaining

22% drop in revenue occurred. It cannot be said that the new system

redistribution of tax revenue has reduced the income of some groups of municipalities

significantly more than the other group. In each size category of municipalities can be

find the village, in which there was a decline, the case for income growth. Dips

in revenue occurred in villages in regions with higher regional

economic activity.



10. The Constitutional Court asked for the representation of the Ministry of Finance also. According to the

his comments, in the assessment of violations of the principle of equality must be on
that is primarily not about redistribution in relation to individual

citizens, but in relation to the territorial entities-specifically in the

relation to the municipalities, whose activities should be mj. and in this way assured.

The range of activities to ensure that communities are largely different in just

Depending on their size. Larger municipalities are becoming the natural

the respective centers of life and then, under certain requirements on

the infrastructure of these communities and to ensure their operation. This

infrastructure users whether or not residents of smaller communities. From that

It follows that when the distribution of the proceeds of taxes is necessary, in addition to the number of

residents set up yet another distinguishing criterion-the coefficient referred to in

the size of the village.



III.



The diction of the provisions of section 4, paragraph 4. 2 Law No. 243/2000 Sb.



11. the applicant challenges the constitutionality of section 4, paragraph 4. 2 of law No. 243/2000

SB. provisions of section 4 (4) Wide. 2 of the Act, as amended by Amendment No 483/2001

Coll. (part is highlighted by underlined text):



"(2) each municipality a percentage of the gross national

the proceeds of the tax referred to in paragraph 1 (b). (b) to (f))) involved laid down

as a percentage. The percentage shall be published by the Ministry of finance in agreement with the Czech

Statistical Office of the Decree, released annually with effect from 1.

September of the current year,



and in the amount corresponding to the proportion of times the population of the municipality according to the

the balance of the population of the Czech Republic to a 1. January of the current year and

the coefficient of the size category of the village to the sum of all the multiples of

municipalities in the Czech Republic. Coefficients of size categories of municipalities are

listed in annex 2 to this Act. "



12. the applicant also suggested the abolition of Annex No. 2 of the law on financial

the determination of taxes, which shall determine the coefficients of the size category of municipalities.



IV.



The abandonment of an oral hearing



13. In accordance with the provisions of section 44, paragraph. 2 of the law on the Constitutional Court may by the constitutional

the Court, with the consent of the participants to refrain from an oral hearing, if not from the

This meeting to expect further clarification of the matter. Due to the fact

He cited the provisions can be applied to the assessment of this case, the constitutional

the Court has requested from the parties to the proceedings, whether the representation agrees with abandonment

from an oral hearing. In order to facilitate communication with the participants in this proceeding

include the challenge of 28 June. in August 2007, the Constitutional Court asked the

the aforementioned agreement, a clause that, if in ten days from the receipt of the call

the absence of appropriate communication, will have the Constitutional Court considered that with the abandonment

from the oral proceedings agrees. Attorney, JUDr. Jaroslav Landlord who

in the meantime, he took over the legal representation of the Group of senators, as plaintiffs,

the filing of 13 June. September 2007, expressed agreement with the abandonment of the oral

the negotiations on this matter. The same approval has been granted and the President of the Senate of the Parliament

The Czech Republic Přemysl Sobotka by letter of 7 April 2004. September 2007. The said

the invitation was delivered by the Constitutional Court, 29 October. 8.2007, even the President of the

The Chamber of deputies of the Czech Parliament Miloslava's Vlček. From this side

no representation occurred, so the full constitutional court assumes

that the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic with the abandonment of

an oral hearing, agrees.



In the.



The conditions of the appellant's evidence is active



14. The proposal was filed by a group of twenty-eight senators of the Senate

The Czech Republic, in accordance with the conditions contained in the provisions of section

64 paragraph. 1 (a). (b) the law on the Constitutional Court). On the side of the plaintiff may be

Therefore, the stated fulfillment locus standi.



VI.



The constitutional conformity of the legislative process



15. The Constitutional Court, in accordance with the provisions of section 68, paragraph. 2 of the law on

The Constitutional Court, in the procedure for checking standards required to assess whether the

the law on the financial destination taxes was accepted and published in the limits of the Constitution

established competence and constitutionally prescribed way.



16. According to information from the Chamber of deputies of the Parliament of the Czech Republic, public

accessible on the sides of the Chamber of Deputies

(http://www.psp.cz), was a draft law on financial destination taxes

submitted to the Chamber of deputies by the Government of the Czech Republic on 18. November

1999. The law was approved by 26 March 2004. May 2000 resolution Of

House No. 1049. For the proposal of the 183 MPs present voted in favor 122.

The Bill was approved by the Senate on June 29. June 2000 of 38 votes

present 65 senators and signed by the President of the Republic on 25.

July 2000. The law was published in the collection of laws under no. 243/2000

SB.



17. In comparison with the original text of the Act was challenged

without prejudice to the provisions of the amendment made by Act No. 483/2001 Coll. As

the data of the Chamber of deputies of the Czech Republic, public

accessible on the sides of the Chamber of Deputies

(http://www.psp.cz), was an amendment to the Act on financial destination taxes

submitted to the Chamber of deputies by the Government of the Czech Republic on 14. June

2001. the proposal was approved on 1 May 2004. November 2001, by the resolution of the

House No. 1833, after its acceptance for 121 members of Parliament voted in favor of the

present 162. The Bill was delivered to the Senate on 5 December. November 2001,

While the Senate Bill did. The President of the Republic signed the

referred to the law of 20 December 2002. December 2001. The law also novelizující challenged

provisions was published in the collection of laws as no 483/2001 Coll. of the above

for those reasons, the Constitutional Court concluded that tagged law

including the contested part of the provisions of section 4, was adopted and issued

in the prescribed manner.



VII.



Content compliance of the contested provisions with constitutional order



18. The Constitutional Court first dealt with the Basic Theses of the proposal, according to which the

in the contested provisions of the discriminatory act. To do so, in accordance with the

its case law, States that the constitutional principle of equality understands especially in

a relative sense of the word. The distinction between the different bodies of law

It is possible to constitutionally permissible and fully, but must not be the result of arbitrariness

(see find SP. zn. PL. ÚS 22/92, a collection of resolutions and of the findings of the constitutional

the Court of the CSFR, finding no 11, page 37, which became part of the settled

the case-law of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic).



19. Equality is, by definition, categories of relative in another sense.

Considered in the category of equality can be only in the relationship between at least two

operators in the same or comparable position (cf. also cited

find SP. zn. PL. ÚS 22/92). While usually not hard to determine whether the

the legislation treats two situations differently, or the same, completely

a key step for the application of the general principle of equality is to establish whether the

There are two situations in which the right to be treated differently, comparable,

Therefore, whether they are relevantly similar. This requires analysis, based

on the criterion of relevance. In simple cases, when is the comparability of

(or nesrovnatelnost) without other apparent, the Constitutional Court of the closer

It does not address these issues. In complex cases, the application of the law

the definition or define a group of people that can be in terms of conservation

the principle of equality to be compared, belongs to the most difficult tasks in the application

This principle (cf. the similarly find SP. zn. PL. ÚS 42/03,

A collection of findings and resolutions of the Constitutional Court, volume 40, finding no 72,

paragraph 57, promulgated under no. 280/2006 Coll.).



20. The assessment of the comparability and relevance of the criteria, therefore, find in itself the

necessarily involves a value judgement, which assumes an understanding of the meaning of

and the purpose of the legislation (to these issues. Bobek, M.-

Boučková, p.-Kühn, z. (eds.), the equality and discrimination. C.h. Beck,

Prague 2007, in particular the chapter I and II). The basic guideline is enumeration

objectified, on the basis of attributes is not allowed

any distinction or differential treatment (cf. Article 3, paragraph 1,

Instruments and similar anti-discrimination provisions in many international

human-legal instruments). The general principle of non-discrimination,

that relied on this proposal, apart from the specific prohibition of the

a specific kind of discrimination that, in the later case is

the law prohibited differentiation criterion explicitly marked. The Constitutional Court

Therefore, he had to first consider whether the applicant compared the situation,

with which the law treats different way indeed comparable in terms of

the principle of non-discrimination, and are therefore relevant for the argument

the prohibition of discrimination.



21. the applicant disputes the legal regulations which establishes the share of municipalities

on the national gross income of some taxes as a proportion of the number of times the

the population of the village and the village size category coefficient to the sum of the following

powers of all municipalities in the Czech Republic (these rates are listed in the

Annex No 2). The reason for this is explained in the explanatory memorandum

the above the law. According to the report "[not to admit to the

individual municipalities have been allocated tax revenues across the Board, only the ratio of the number of

the population of the municipality on the number of inhabitants of the CZECH REPUBLIC. There would be a significant downturn in the

resources, in particular, of the Magistrates ' and big cities-impact would amount to approx. 15

billion Czk. It turned out that, at present, is only applicable

a pointer to which is possible to bind the level of income of the municipality, its size.

Established 14 size categories. When setting the size

categories of municipalities was mj. of the standard deviations from the average
income tax personal income from dependent activity and income tax

natural persons from self-employment on residents. Have been

generated the coefficients of size categories. ... This approach

It is a very strong incentive for desirable merging the smallest

municipalities. Income taxes, logically connected with the territory of the municipality are mostly consistently

municipalities are left as their exclusive tax revenue. This system is

to increase tax revenues, approximately three quarters of the municipalities in the Czech Republic and reduced to one

quarter. "



22. the provision of the law Designated by the petitioner, occurs to

discrimination of some municipalities. It sees the violation of the prohibition of discrimination in the

the meaning of the article. 1, or article. 3 of the Charter of fundamental rights and freedoms. With

taking into account the meaning of the constitutional principle of the general prohibition of discrimination and

the purpose of the legal budget destination of the proceeds of certain taxes

local government bodies, is not, according to the Constitutional Court, at all

comparable situation and status for example. municipalities to 100 residents and municipalities between the

10 001 and 20 000 inhabitants. Therefore, if the legislature created a total of 14

categories of municipalities with the coefficients of the size category of the village from the 0.4213 (for the

the village population to 100) in 2.7611 (for the city of Prague), cannot talk

about the different regulation of comparable situations, but their treatment

with the monitor situations. It is, therefore, from the constitutional point of view fully

justified, and cannot establish a constitutional problem nestejného treatment

the same, if the legislature with different categories of municipalities are treated differently

and diferencuje them into 14 groups based on the number of inhabitants. In this

aspect because the Constitutional Court had to identify with notorietou, on

you pointed out and the Ministry of finance, that is. that the range of activities that

the municipality shall ensure to a large extent vary also depending on their

the size of the. Larger municipalities are becoming natural the respective centers of life and

It then imply certain requirements on their infrastructure and

ensure their operation. This infrastructure, while also using

residents of smaller communities.



23. You cannot even identify with, by the distribution of municipalities in 14 categories

It was arbitrary. Should be noted that every distinction necessarily leads to

a certain schematizaci and to the regulatory overhang adjustment towards the negative and

positive. Each of the General standard, which regulated the relations and diferencuje

analyses the different regulation, may be in some of the individual

cases too wide and in other cases a little wide. Other

words, it is not completely ruled out that some municipalities between 1 501 to 5 000

the population would have been, with regard to there already existing infrastructure or

other relevant circumstances, is worthy of the same coefficient as the village between 5

001 to 10 000 inhabitants. The benefits of General editing, consisting of easy

enforcement and options to automate the decision making process in the area of

application of the law to do/see Boguszak, j.: theory of law-making

(values, standards, legal principles), in: Faculty of law UK 1348-1998.

Jubilee collection, Prague: Karolinum, 1998, p. 164 et seq., however.

principle clearly outweigh the possible negative range of the General

the criteria of the standards in the individual case. These conclusions apply more of it in the

areas of increased automating application process, as is currently

tax area (see Boguszak, cit.).



24. Since the Constitutional Court nedovodil that the position of the municipalities with varying large

the number of the population was comparable, it was not necessary to even further

to examine whether there are grounds which, within the meaning of the case-law,

to justify different treatment of the bodies in a comparable situation

(including the question of the public interest, an objective and reasonable justification

and proportionality). In the present case, namely, the Constitutional Court

reiterates, on a comparable situation is not at all.

He proceeded to, in this case, the Constitutional Court, otherwise, it would

the powers given to him by the constitutional order of the Czech Republic and the

the autonomous sphere of political decision-making, as to whether it will be

treated with heterogeneous differently or just decide in principle belongs

exclusively normotvůrci.



25. If the Constitutional Court Ruled nesrovnatelnost situations, with which it is

treated differently, does not have the power to review further then the statutory

the adjustment in terms of violations of the principle of equality. Such regulation

different situations, it is fundamentally a question of political considerations of the legislature:

"



In a situation where there is adequate reason, which allows distinguishing between the two

the type of situations, the resolution may or may not be normotvůrcem done.

The decision, whether that happens depends only on the normotvůrci itself: to

This process of political discretion, the Court may not intervene. Constitutionally

Conformal in the situation of an adequate reason, allowing light to the resolution

How to edit this resolution making, so adjustment, which this resolution

does, because in neither case you cannot talk about the arbitrariness

the legislator

"(as follows, with reference to the doctrine of r. Alexyho Mite, m.-Boučková, P.-

Kühn, z. (eds.), the equality and discrimination, C.H. Beck, 2007, Prague.

56, emphasis in the original). Only as obiter dictum to the constitutional

the Court stated that even the effects of the new legislation, in comparison with the

previous legislation are not discriminatory or in that comparison,

which (mistakenly, as follows from the above), the applicant shall submit. How

said the Union of towns and municipalities of the CZECH REPUBLIC, in each size category of municipalities can be found

the village, in which, as a result of the new legislation have decreased,

or earnings growth; the declines in revenue for municipalities, while there

located in regions with higher regional economic activity.



26. According to the contested provisions of the Act are also in breach of article.

8 article. 100 (1) and article. paragraph 101. 3 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC, as adopted by the legal

the adjustment does not guarantee sufficient income to small municipalities to carry out their functions

and, in order to ensure that the living conditions of its citizens, comparable

with larger cities. This supports migration to the large side of the population

cities and depopulation of the countryside.



27. In addition to this finding did not bring any other proposal

constitutionally-legal argument. Space to derogačnímu the intervention of the constitutional

the Court would, in his opinion, it is only if it was found

and demonstrated that the legislation virtually prevents the constitutionally

guaranteed the right to self-government of territorial self-governing units according to article

8 of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC. The proposal for such a line of argument and not brought in proceedings before the

The Constitutional Court was established, that the existing legislation

prevent certain categories of municipalities, especially those small, their

an autonomous existence, i.e.. that would be their income fell below the level,

hinder the exercise of self-government within the meaning of article. 8 of the Constitution.



28. the proposal also argues the pressure state to merge small municipalities, thereby

State power consciously accelerates basically liquidating small municipalities. Occurs

also to increase the number of the inhabitants of the fictional with the municipalities, which are on

the border of each category. It is noted that any legal

the adjustment may in practice give rise to some contradictory and problematic

the consequences. To assess the effectiveness and the appropriateness of the legal question is, however,

only the powers of the legislature, in which the activities of the Constitutional Court, in addition to

cases detected neústavnosti, cannot intervene.



29. The proposal provides that the real purpose of the annulment of the contested provisions has

be provoking public debate, and the subsequent determination "of

the minimum of the municipality, i.e.. the legal guarantee of such income, which would

ensure the functioning of territorial self-government and appropriate living conditions and

residents of larger cities. " At this point, the Constitutional Court emphasises that it is

the judicial authority, the protection of constitutionality (article 83 of the Constitution.). Therefore it is not the purpose of

his decision to initiate activities or run any political

the discussion. Most of the participants in the proceedings, as well as other institutions, which

the proposal, highlighted the complex political nature of the whole

things, which requires a degree of experimentation, but also experience with

real time impact to the operation of the Act, each of the municipalities. The constitutional

the Court points out that, with regard to the nature of the functioning of the judiciary,

any information in these areas does not have and have not

cannot. Therefore, it is not for him to expediency, justice or

the reasonableness of any legislation any express (similar considerations led

The u.s. Supreme Court to the formulation of the principle of restraint in court matters

primarily political-see



political question doctrine

).



30. According to the article. 5 of the Constitution of the Czech Republic's political system 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 individual plaintiffs, as leaders to be able to

legislative, considers that the contested legislation by them is inappropriate or

evoking the negative consequences can seek a change in the framework of the

political competition, not in the framework of judicial control of the constitutionality of

their very nature, must be confined to questions of constitutionally legal in nature.
If the Constitutional Court upheld the proposal and decided the whole thing instead of

the legislature would not only violated the cited provisions of the Constitution of the CZECH REPUBLIC, but

in particular, he made an unnecessary competition of political parties, whose task is to

MJ. right to submit, in terms of their voters, the most appropriate ways to

the allocation of the State budget.



31. With regard to the above conclusions of law, the Constitutional Court ruled,

as stated in the statement.



The President of the Constitutional Court:



JUDr. Rychetský in r.