If I did not want to be bound by international law I wouldn’t do it differently

The author is a lawyer Via Iuris

There is a possible denial of obligations to comply with the fundamental rights arising from international law behind the facade of two sexes.

In the center of attention in the design of the amendment to the Constitution is to supplement Article 52a, which sets: « The Slovak Republic recognizes only the sex of men and women. » However, this article is only a smoke curtain. And it is an aperture, as it should be: simple, controversial, does not talk about anything together, and most people only pause.

The fact whether Article 52a will remain in the proposal or will be released from it, there is no role, because what the government coalition really is is hidden in a boring and very professional article 7. The key in its current version is paragraphs 2 and 5. priority over our laws. The proposed articles 6 and 7 now suggest that this will not be the case in matters of national identity.

National identity – an integrity partner who does not ask for shares

National identity is not a new term that the government coalition invented. It is a term that the Treaty on the European Union also envisages in Article 4 when it stipulates that in matters of national identity the Union’s right takes precedence over the national legal order and the affairs of national identity remain in the jurisdiction of the Member States. The exclusive jurisdiction in matters of national identity is therefore guaranteed to the Slovak Republic.

The problem is how the national identity is the government coalition with support KDH define. It has basic cultural-ethical issues relating to the protection of life and human dignity, private and family life, marriage, parenting and family, public morality, personal status, culture and language, as well as decisions on things related to health, science, education, education, personal status and inheritance.

It is not clear on the basis of which key the government coalition has decided on this calculation, and it is no longer clear why the question of human dignity is the subject of national identity.

Human dignity is a core concept in the field of not only legal science, but also ethics. All fundamental rights come from human dignity. Therefore, there is a justified concern that the Slovak Republic will accept other boundaries of the fundamental rights of its citizens as the rest of the democratic world.

Perhaps we cannot expect the government coalition to make this change because the European Court of Human Rights applies the fundamental rights of Prúzko and the government coalition would wish us a wider interpretation.

KDH as a big gatsby

Another problem of the proposal is the retroactivity of the law. In the proposed Article 7 paragraph 7, it is stated that « nothing in this Constitution and Constitutional Laws cannot be interpreted as the consent of the Slovak Republic to transfer part of its rights in matters forming national identity. »

In practice, it is expected that the international conventions that the Slovak Republic have already signed is not binding it if they concern the questions of national identity. When reading the author, the scene emerged from Great Gatsby when Jay Gatsby wanted to hear his love Daisy to say that she never liked his Soka Tom.

The belief that this sentence will erase the past reminds the intention of the government coalition and KDH to force the constitution to admit that nothing that the Slovak Republic has registered may not apply. The problem that the coalition with the KDH encounters is that the right excludes the return effects of law into the past because of the principle of predictability of legal rules.

Refusing the legal consequences of the steps we have voluntarily enrolled is not only unlawful, but also immoral.

In a very problematic provision: « The Slovak Republic retains the sovereignty, especially in matters of national identity, especially for the basic cultural-ethical issues, », the government coalition was able to deny the basic requirement for law-its clarity-twice.

The words « especially » and « especially » are used if you do not want to limit the calculation because you expect other facts. However, this practice can also be easily applied in manipulative and fraudulent practices. Let’s just try one example.

You would sign a contract for buying a car in which the seller would tell you: the flawless condition of the car applies mainly to its chassis and the car is safe especially when driving on a dry surface. In the draft amendment to the Constitution, the question comes: Is the reason for so many uncertainties a bad intention?

With the legislative process you no longer worry about

The decision of the decision Constitutional Court In the case of criminal laws, it has greatly released the hands of bending the legislative process. We can expect that if a coalition with KDH opens a discussion for at least a few hours, they will meet the minimum standards requested by the Constitutional Court.

The original proposal of changes in Article 7 of the Constitution submitted to the interdepartmental comment procedure was completely different from the one approved by the government and submitted to Parliament. Given the publicized agreement of the KDH coalition, the proposal from the first reading will again differ from the one that MEPs will vote on in the second reading. This does not sound like a predictability of the legislator’s intention.

From Monday we can expect a fast meeting of the Constitutional Law Committee, a short parliamentary discussion and an express vote.

At first glance, the amendment to the Constitution will anchor two genders and equality at work. However, the problem lies in what we do not see at first sight. The author does not want to devalue the importance of the same rating for the same job. He also does not want to embark on the issue of primary school biology. However, if he intended to avoid bindings by international law, it would not otherwise do so.