Tulkinnan muuttaminen valtiosäännön kehittämiskeinona

Kirjoittajat

• Mikael Hidén

Abstrakti

There are two ways to effectuate changes in the body of constitutional norms: formal changes or addition to the written norms and changes in the interpretation of the written norms or in the customary law. According to the author, formal changes are in principle preferrable to changes of interpretation. The main reason for this point of view are that Finnish law and legal traditions are dominantly based on written law. Also, the procedure for enacting amendments to the Constitution is practical enough to allow constitutional changes always when they have the stable backing of a 2/3 majority. And the Constitution makes it possible to enact in that procedure laws which are exceptions to the Constitution but do not become a part of the constitutional provisions. To be sure, constitutional norms do change in Finland through gradual, changes in interpretation. The Constitutional Law Committee of the Parliament, which is a central organ in questions of constitutional interpretation, has in general been very careful in changing its established practice.