User:Cimmerian praetor/sandbox

Jurisdiction
The major part of the court's workload consists of individual petitions of citizen's alleged violations of their constitutional rights after all other remedies were exhausted (including appeals to the Supreme Court or the Supreme Administrative Court).

In line with the Article 87 of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court has the following jurisdiction:

Constitutional complaints of individuals
A physical or legal person may lodge a constitutional complaint alleging breach of their basic right or freedom, which is guaranteed by the Constitutional Order, by an effective decision, measure or intervention of a public authority. The complaint must be lodged within two months from the delivery of the decision on the last remedy (appeal) or, when there is no effective remedy, within two months from learning about the intervention of the public authority into their basic rights (one year from the intervention at the latest).

The Court does not have a role of a third instance and it is not, formally, a superior court to the general courts. Its jurisdiction lies in deciding whether the previous process led to breach of constitutional rights or freedoms. Full review of the previous process may be possible where there were alleged breaches of constitutional processual principles, such as the right for judicial protection, right for lawful judge, equality of parties, right for public hearing and expression of opinion on all of the admitted evidence.

In case that the complaint includes also a motion to repeal law or other regulation, or when the senate reaches conclusion that the underlying law or regulation is unconstitutional, the proceedings regarding the complaint are suspended until the plenum decides on the law's/regulation's constitutionality.

In case that the court satisfies the complaint, it holds a ruling whereby it specifies which constitutional right or freedom was breached by the intervention of the public authority and it repeals the decision or orders the public authority to cease the breach and, if possible, restore the previous situation.

In 2012, the Constitutional Court received 4.915 The number includes also complaints of municipal or regional assemblies against illegal interventions of state against their right for self-governance constitutional complaints.

Repeal of laws & other legal regulations or individual provisions thereof
The Constitutional Court shall repeal laws & other legal regulations (e.g. Governmental Regulations, Ministerial or Municipal Ordinances, etc.) or individual provisions thereof should they contravene the constitutional order. The decision making is taken by the plenary session of the Court; at least 10 out of 15 judges must be present for the Court to be quorate. A majority of at least 9 Justices is needed for a law to be repealed, which may in rare cases lead to the majority ruling of 8 against 7 Justices that a law is unconstitutional, whereby it still remains in force.

The Constitutional Court has held that it has also jurisdiction to review and repeal Constitutional Enactments, even though no such authority is explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. When reviewing the Constitutional Act No. 195/2009 Coll. in connection with individual petition of a Deputy (who claimed that his right to hold the office was breached when the Parliament adopted the said law on the dissolution of Parliament and holding of early elections instead of using a standard constitutional way of reaching early elections, which requires a series of failed attempts to constitute a Government with Parliamentary majority), the Court held that the imperative of the material core of the Constitution, i.e. inviolability of the value of democratic society, may not be changed. This enshrines for example in Section 9(2) of the Constitution: "The substantive requisites of the democratic, law-abiding State may not be amended" as well as in other parts of the Constitution and the Charter. The Court repealed the Constitutional Act, ruling that ad hoc changes of Constitution are against the democratic order.

Other notable case concerned repeal of Governmental Regulation No. 467/2009 Coll., which specified what amounts of drugs were considered "small" for the purposes of the Criminal Code (which criminalizes only possession of amounts of drugs "larger than small"). The motion was filed by a District Court which considered it in breach of Article 39 of the Charter which states that "only a law may designate which acts constitute a crime and what penalties, or other detriments to rights or property, may be imposed for committing them". (See also: Drug policy of the Czech Republic)

{| | Style = "vertical-align: top;" |

Repeal of laws
The motion to repeal a law or individual provisions thereof may be brought by:
 * an individual when
 * filing a constitutional complaint claiming that the alleged breach of rights arises out of the law's unconstitutionality
 * filing a motion for renewal of proceedings following an international court's decision on breach of the individual's human rights (typically, a decision of the European Court for Human Rights),
 * a senate or the plenum of the Constitutional Court when deciding a constitutional complaint (typically, either a complaint brought by individual or municipality),
 * a court in case it is deciding a case and comes to the conclusion that a law to be applied contravenes constitution,
 * the President of the Republic,
 * a group of at least 41 Deputies or 17 Senators (typically, by the members of Parliamentary opposition when trying to stop reforms pushed through by the majority of Governmental parties),
 * the Government in case that an international court delivers that a Czech law is in breach of an obligation of the Czech Republic arising out of an international convention to which it is a party.

| Style = "vertical-align: top;" |

Repeal of other legal regulations
The motion to repeal other legal regulations or individual provisions thereof may be brought by: The motions to repeal a law are most commonly brought by general courts (on average 18 a year between 2000 and 2012), by individuals (~ 9 a year), and by the Senators and Deputies (~ 9 a year combined). The Ministry of Interior is also relatively active in bringing motions to repeal Ordinances of regions and municipalities (~ 6 a year). The other ways of bringing the motion are used quite rarely.
 * an individual when
 * filing a constitutional complaint claiming that the alleged breach of rights arises out of the law's unconstitutionality
 * filing a motion for renewal of proceedings following an international court's decision on breach of the individual's human rights,
 * a senate or the plenum of the Constitutional Court when deciding a constitutional complaint,
 * a court in case it is deciding a case and comes to the conclusion that a legal regulation to be applied contravenes Constitution or law,
 * the Government,
 * a group of at least 25 Deputies or 10 Senators,
 * a Regional Assembly,
 * Ombudsman,
 * Ministry of Interior in case of Ordinances of a municipality, region or the Capital City of Prague,
 * responsible Ministry in case of Regulations of a region or the Capital City of Prague concerning self-governance,
 * a chief of the Regional Authority in case of Regulations of a municipality,
 * a Municipal Assembly in case of a Regulation or Ordinance of the appropriate Region.
 * }

Complaints against illegal state interventions into the right for self-governance
Article 8 of the Constitution guarantees the right for territorial self-government of territorial units. This is further elaborated in the Constitution's Chapter 7 which is wholly dedicated to the issue. The entire surface of the Czech Republic is divided into regions and further into municipalities (apart from 5 military areas). Under Article 101(4), the State may intervene in the activities of self-governing territorial divisions only if such intervention is required by protection of the law and only in a manner defined by law.

Technically, a complaint may be filed by an assembly of a municipality/region and it is treated in the same way as a complaint of a physical or a legal individual (see above). In the past, the Constitutional Court has received, for example, a complaint of Liberec Region against the decision of the Ministry of Education to transfer secondary schools into the Region's hands (which was part of a wider school reform), or a complaint of South Moravian Region against repeal of its spatial planning by the Supreme Administrative Court (which was deciding on the action brought by 13 municipalities as a part of tug-of-war over route of a planned highway).

Jurisdiction disputes between state agencies and territorial self-government agencies
Disputes regarding jurisdiction may be either positive (both authorities claim it) or negative (no authority accepts to deal with the issue) and may take either between two sate agencies, or agency-territorial unit, or two territorial units. The motion may be brought either by a state agency or by a municipal/regional assembly. The decision of the Court is taken by its plenum.

The Court was deciding, for example, whether it is the responsibility of a Region or the Ministry of Health to ensure existence of first aid network, or who is responsible to decide on objection of partiality against the President of the Supreme Court during disciplinary proceedings with its Vice-President.

Election of a Deputy or Senator
The Constitutional Court hears appeals against decisions in matters of confirmation of the election of a Deputy or Senator.

Eligibility and on incompatibility of holding the office
reservations on loss of eligibility and on incompatibility of holding the office of Deputy or Senator according to Article 25,

Dissolution of a political party

 * whether a decision on the dissolution of a political party, or another decision regarding the activity of a political party, conforms to constitutional or other laws,

Impeachment of the President of the Republic
impeachment by the Senate of the President of the Republic under Article 65, par. 2,

Decision on execution of selected presidential duties by the Prime Minister
the Presidential proposal to repeal a decision of the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate according to Article 66 (decision on execution of selected presidential duties being handed over to the Prime Minister in case of President's inability to execute them himself for a serious reason),

Implementation of a ruling by an international court
measures essential for the implementation of a ruling by an international court, which is binding for the Czech Republic, unless it can be implemented in a different manner,

Referendum on accession to the EU

 * on the remedy against a decision adopted by the President of the Republic not to announce a referendum concerning the accession of the Czech Republic to the European Union, on whether the procedure of the referendum concerning the accession of the Czech Republic to the European Union is in accordance with the Constitutional Act on Referendum concerning the Accession of the Czech Republic to the European Union and the implementing regulation related thereto.

Also, in cases when an already abolished law contrary to the constitutional order should be applied by a general court, it shall submit the issue to the Constitutional Court (Art. 95 par. 2).

Communist past
The Communist past of some nominees is a highly debated issue in the Czech Republic. For example Jan Sváček's two nominations, by Václav Klaus and by Miloš Zeman, have raised protests and were rejected by the Senate. Nominations of Jaroslav Fenyk and Jan Filip, a long time members of the Communist party at the time after the Soviet Invasion and installment of Puppet Government also stirred controversy, although they were ultimately approved by the Senate.

The Communist party membership in years ~1965 - ~1969, i.e. from the Prague Spring democratization effort until soon after the invasion, is generally not seen as controversial, especially where the Justices later became anti-establishment dissidents, such as the President Pavel Rychetský.

Klaus' failures to replenish
During the presidency of Václav Klaus, the number of Justices of the Constitutional Court fell to mere 11 in 2004 and to mere 12 in 2013, which impacted the Court's backlog of cases as well as its ability to conduct plenary review of laws and regulations. This later became one of the charges connected with the 2013 Senate's action to impeach Klaus.

Refs
Designated Reserves of the State (Stanovené zálohy státu) is a militia-style training program provided to civilian firearm owners under auspices of the Government of the Czech Republic. The program provides practical shooting training to participants in different levels, focused on individual defensive gun use, soft targets protection, defense against active attacker, and use of firearm during state of emergency. Members of the Designated Reserve may be called up with their private firearms as reinforcement of emergency services, and, apart from the basic level participants, receive free ammunition (or reimbursement thereof) for their shooting training.

Legal basis
Along with the 2021 Firearms Act Amendment, the Parliament passed also an Act No. 14/2021 Coll., on the handling of weapons in certain cases affecting the internal order or security of the Czech Republic. The Act's number 14/21 symbolically refers to the 600th anniversary of civilian firearms possession in the country. The legislation establishes "a system of firearms training, the purpose of which is to improve the knowledge, abilities and skills of persons authorised to handle firearms for the purpose of ensuring internal order or the security of the Czech Republic".

Details regarding the Designated Reserve and system of firearms training are dealt with in Government Regulation No. 255/2021. Within the system, private companies approved by the authorities provide advanced shooting training to firearm owners that have E (concealed carry) type of license. After passing a set of requirements and taking an oath, the participants become part of the Designated Reserve of the State, whereby they may be called up with their private firearms to support the work of police or armed forces in a crisis event. While the law anticipates founding of firearms training for both internal security as well as defense, as of 2023 only the former was in place.

Training under auspices of Ministry of Interior
Firearms training for purposes of internal security comprises of three general and one additional level. The training is provided by private companies and conducted under auspices of the Ministry of Interior. Participants become members of the designated reserve after accomplishing all Level 1 requirements, including oath taking.

For Level 2 and higher, the ammunition cost is reimbursed by the Government and selected parts of the training may be conducted by mutual combat with use of simunition.

Training under auspices of Ministry of Defense
The legislation anticipates establishment of courses for internal security under auspices of the Ministry of Interior, and for state defense purposes under auspices of Ministry of Defense. As of 2023, only the former has been established.