THE FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS AND RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL AND THE CITIZENS RECOGNIZED BY THE INTERNATIONAL LAW AND DETERMINED BY THE CONSTITUTION, THROUGH THE PRISM OF THE COMPLEX RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT AND THE REGULAR COURTS

DILEMMAS OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL JUDGES

Апстракт

This paper examines the competence of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of North Macedonia to annul
judgments rendered by regular courts, with a focus on the dilemmas arising from this competence and the
varying constitutional court orders issued over several years. Considering that the Constitution grants the
Constitutional Court the authority to independently regulate its work through an Act adopted by the Court itself,
the issue discussed in this paper represents a highly significant constitutional and legal matter. It has profound
implications for the functioning of the Constitutional Court, the relationship between the Constitutional Court
and regular courts, and the overall coherence of the legal order. The paper analyzes previous constitutional court
practices in this area, offers a critical evaluation of these practices, and proposes an approach that reinforces the
constitutionally established role of the Constitutional Court as the guardian of the Constitution and the protector
of rights and freedoms within its jurisdiction.