“Priority question of constitutionality” vs “constitutional complaint”: in search of the effectiveness of institutions

The study focuses on a comprehensive systemic analysis and comparative study of the functional features of two important constitutional and legal mechanisms: the French institution of the priority question of constitutionality (QPC) and the Ukrainian institution of the constitutional complaint. The main goal of such an analytical approach is to identify key differences in their functioning, effectiveness of application and legal consequences in order to further determine the optimal ways of modernization and improvement of the Ukrainian constitutional institution. The French experience of implementing the QPC is of particular scientific and practical value in this context, since this model demonstrates a unique and balanced combination of three important elements: the mechanism of judicial filtering of cases, the principle of open and accessible appeal of citizens, as well as direct and immediate integration of constitutional control procedures into the general process of judicial consideration of cases, which ensures the effectiveness of constitutional justice. The article provides a comparative analysis of the institution of priority question of constitutionality (QPC) in the French Republic and constitutional complaint in Ukraine. The legal principles of the functioning of both mechanisms are disclosed, in particular, the grounds, subjects and subject of appeals, terms of consideration and procedural features. It is shown that the French model of QPC provides for wider access to constitutional control and is integrated into judicial proceedings, since any of the parties to the proceedings can initiate a constitutional question directly during the consideration of the case, and the decision of the Constitutional Council automatically affects the main proceedings. In contrast, in Ukraine, a constitutional complaint is of a limited nature: it can be used only by individuals or legal entities of private law after a final court decision, and only in relation to the law that was directly applied in the case. Separately, the absence of regulatory deadlines for considering a complaint by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, which negatively affects the effectiveness of human rights protection, is emphasized. In addition, the judicial practice of both countries is outlined: decisions of the Constitutional Council on the protection of rights and decisions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine adopted on the basis of a constitutional complaint. According to the results of the analysis, ways of improving the Ukrainian mechanism are proposed, in particular, the introduction of a filtration instance, automatic review of cases after the norm is recognized as unconstitutional, and the expansion of the subject composition. It is concluded that the French model is more flexible and effective. It is oriented towards the real protection of human rights and freedoms.