Yes but the institutions are defined in the constitutions.
In the Republic of Ireland we have a relatively good constitution, fairly active, that has a vast hole in the first paragraph of Article 45:
ARTICLE 45
The principles of social policy set forth in this Article are intended for the general guidance of the Oireachtas. The application of those principles in the making of laws shall be the care of the Oireachtas exclusively, and shall not be cognisable by any Court under any of the provisions of this Constitution.
This obviously both deliberate and insane. We should remove it. It is the biggest institutional flaw in our constitution. But Bunreacht na hEireann is worth so much more than the paper its printed on, or the jurisdiction of the courts it defines. It is the code of the country, the will of the people, enacted, modified and attained. It is the source of our of our law, our shared hope, and our sense of gathered self. We are our constitution, we are free.
The Irish superior courts do review legislation, though.
"The judicial power of government of those courts includes the power to review the compatibility of statutes with the Constitution and to judicially review subordinate legislation, decisions or actions of the Government or State bodies with a view to determining their legality and compatability with the Constitution, and principles deriving from the Constitution such as due process" [0]
I don't understand how Article 45 is interpreted but it's clearly not seen as a loophole where the Oireachtas can be the final arbiter over whether its laws are constitutional.
I'm curious but to me it reads like its meant to avoid legislation happening through usage of the courts like what often happens in the us? Is Ireland a common law system?
The hole is the lack of access to the courts to to appeal decisions of the Government on maybe 90% of the business of the Governement. If you read the rest of the article it's actually pretty cool if old fashioned. If it was justicable it would be awesome.
No, this is good. If the people want something they can vote a government in to do it. Otherwise you get abominations like when the Taiwanese Supreme Court legalized gay marriage after a referendum rejected it. If you’re going to go that far you might as well just drop the democratic pretense from liberal democracy and just go with liberalism.
If making gay marriage illegal violates the Taiwanese constitution, the people had already decided they want it to be legal. If they don't want that, they can change the constitution.
1 The State shall strive to promote the welfare of the whole people by securing and protecting as effectively as it may a social order in which justice and charity shall inform all the institutions of the national life.
2 The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing:–
i That the citizens (all of whom, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of livelihood) may through their occupations find the means of making reasonable provision for their domestic needs.
ii That the ownership and control of the material resources of the community may be so distributed amongst private individuals and the various classes as best to subserve the common good.
iii That, especially, the operation of free competition shall not be allowed so to develop as to result in the concentration of the ownership or control of essential commodities in a few individuals to the common detriment.
iv That in what pertains to the control of credit the constant and predominant aim shall be the welfare of the people as a whole.
v That there may be established on the land in economic security as many families as in the circumstances shall be practicable.
3 1° The State shall favour and, where necessary, supplement private initiative in industry and commerce.
2° The State shall endeavour to secure that private enterprise shall be so conducted as to ensure reasonable efficiency in the production and distribution of goods and as to protect the public against unjust exploitation.
4 1° The State pledges itself to safeguard with especial care the economic interests of the weaker sections of the community, and, where necessary, to contribute to the support of the infirm, the widow, the orphan, and the aged.
2° The State shall endeavour to ensure that the strength and health of workers, men and women, and the tender age of children shall not be abused and that citizens shall not be forced by economic necessity to enter avocations unsuited to their sex, age or strength.
In the Republic of Ireland we have a relatively good constitution, fairly active, that has a vast hole in the first paragraph of Article 45:
ARTICLE 45
The principles of social policy set forth in this Article are intended for the general guidance of the Oireachtas. The application of those principles in the making of laws shall be the care of the Oireachtas exclusively, and shall not be cognisable by any Court under any of the provisions of this Constitution.
This obviously both deliberate and insane. We should remove it. It is the biggest institutional flaw in our constitution. But Bunreacht na hEireann is worth so much more than the paper its printed on, or the jurisdiction of the courts it defines. It is the code of the country, the will of the people, enacted, modified and attained. It is the source of our of our law, our shared hope, and our sense of gathered self. We are our constitution, we are free.