[:uk]
Resolution of the Grand Chamber of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine dated October 1, 2024, No. 6-уп/2024
Case Summary:
The Grand Chamber of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine examined the constitutional submission of 51 Members of Parliament of Ukraine. The deputies challenged the constitutionality of the provisions of Section I and the second paragraph of Subparagraph 1 of Paragraph 2 of Section II of the Law of Ukraine “On Recognizing the Law of Ukraine ‘On the List of State Property Objects Not Subject to Privatization’ as Invalid” dated October 2, 2019, No. 145-IX (hereinafter referred to as Law No. 145).
Main Provisions of the Resolution:
- Closure of Constitutional Proceedings: The Constitutional Court of Ukraine closed the proceedings in the case concerning the constitutional submission of the deputies based on the grounds provided by law.
- Provision of Section I of Law No. 145:
- Section I of Law No. 145 recognized as invalid the Law of Ukraine “On the List of State Property Objects Not Subject to Privatization” No. 847-XIV.
- The authors of the submission believed that this contradicts several articles of the Constitution of Ukraine, particularly regarding the powers of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and the protection of state property.
- The Court established that the actual repeal of the list of objects not subject to privatization was caused by the actions of the legislator, but the issue of the absence of legislative regulation does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine.
- The Court noted that addressing the issue of legislative gaps in this area falls within the competence of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
- Provision of the second paragraph of Subparagraph 1 of Paragraph 2 of Section II of Law No. 145:
- This provision excluded the nineteenth paragraph from part two of Article 4 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Privatization of State and Communal Property” No. 2269-VIII, which concerned the national postal operator.
- The Members of Parliament argued that this contradicts the Constitution of Ukraine, as it may lead to the alienation of property belonging to the state postal operator.
- The Court established that the authors of the submission did not provide adequate justification for their claims regarding the unconstitutionality of this provision.
- The Court emphasized that assumptions cannot be considered arguments supporting the unconstitutionality of legal acts.
- Grounds for Closing Proceedings:
- Regarding Section I of Law No. 145 – based on paragraph 2 of Article 62 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine,” since the issue does not fall within the Court’s jurisdiction.
- Regarding the second paragraph of Subparagraph 1 of Paragraph 2 of Section II of Law No. 145 – based on paragraph 3 of Article 62 of the same law, due to the constitutional submission’s non-compliance with legal requirements.
- Court Conclusions:
- The Constitutional Court of Ukraine does not have the authority to resolve issues related to legislative gaps caused by legislative inaction.
- The constitutional submission must contain adequate justification for claims of unconstitutionality of an act or its individual provisions.
Key Aspects of the Resolution:
- The Court emphasized its powers defined by the Constitution of Ukraine and the Law “On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine.”
- The absence of a legislative act that should have been adopted by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine cannot be subject to consideration by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine.
- Failure to provide adequate justification in the constitutional submission is grounds for refusal to consider the case.
Final Provisions:
The resolution of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is final and not subject to appeal.
[:]
