National Constitutional Justice in Context. Beyond the dialogue/conflict dichotomy
The dichotomy of dialogue/conflict with the CJEU has re-emerged in many countries in relation to a series of prominent rulings by constitutional courts, the “Taricco saga“ and the PSPP judgments being the most known examples. The same is true also with regard to the relationship with the ECtHR. This panel argues that a consideration of the specific features of each system of constitutional adjudication and of their context can offer insights that enrich the dialogue/conflict dichotomy – a dichotomy that is not always satisfactory. From a domestic and comparative perspective, we argue that constitutional courts‘ attitude towards the European Courts does not merely depend on constitutional courts‘ willingness to engage in either dialogue or conflict with the CJEU or the ECtHR. It also reflects concerns that are country-specific and call into question the effectiveness, the legitimacy, and the authority of national constitutional courts in a different way in each legal order.