Skip to main content

What’s New: Week of March 30

 — Marieta Safta, Professor Phd, Titu Maiorescu University, Bucharest, Romania

In this weekly feature, I-CONnect publishes a curated reading list of developments in public law. “Developments” may include a selection of links to news, high court decisions, new or recent scholarly books and articles, and blog posts from around the public law blogosphere.

To submit relevant developments for our weekly feature on “What’s New in Public Law,” please email iconnecteditors@gmail.com.

Developments in Constitutional Courts

  1. The Constitutional Court of Kosovo ruled on 25 March 2026 that the presidential decree dissolving the Assembly produces no legal effects. The Court held that the conditions for dissolution had not been met under the Constitution and emphasised the primacy of parliamentary procedures in resolving institutional deadlock. As a consequence, the members of the Assembly of the Republic of Kosovo have thirty-four (34) days from the date of entry into force of this Judgment to conduct and complete the procedure for the election of the President of the Republic of Kosovo.
  2. In South Korea, the Constitutional Court issued its first decisions on 24 March 2026 under a newly reformed constitutional complaint system that now allows challenges against court judgments. In its first preliminary review, the Court rejected all 26 constitutional complaints  brought against judicial decisions, finding that none met the admissibility requirements and referring no cases to the full bench. This marks the first practical application of a major reform that entered into force on 12 March 2026, which extended constitutional review to ordinary court rulings for the first time.  
  3. In South Africa, the Constitutional Court held on 25 March 2026 in South African Commercial Catering and Allied Workers Union v Massmart Holdings and Others that the Labour Court lacks jurisdiction under section 68(1)(b) of the Labour Relations Act to award just and equitable compensation for losses arising from unlawful conduct committed during a protected strike. The majority clarified that section 68 applies only to unprotected strikes, and that the occurrence of criminal or delictual conduct during a protected strike does not bring such claims within the Labour Court’s jurisdiction. Instead, such claims must be pursued in the ordinary courts under delictual principles. The judgment draws a clear distinction between the statutory consequences of protected and unprotected strikes and limits the scope of labour-court remedies in cases of strike-related misconduct.
  4. The Court of Justice of the European Union delivered its Grand Chamber judgment in Case C-767/23 (Remling)on 24 March 2026, clarifying the scope of the obligation of courts of last instance to make a preliminary reference under Article 267 TFEU.The Court held that where a national court of last instance decides not to refer a question to the Court of Justice, it must provide specific and concrete reasons demonstrating that one of the recognised exceptions to the duty to refer—such as acte clair or acte éclairé—applies in the particular case.The judgment further clarifies that national procedural rules allowing supreme courts to dismiss appeals with summary reasoning cannot relieve them of the obligation to justify, in a sufficiently reasoned manner, their decision not to make a preliminary reference.  
  5. The Court of Justice of the European Union delivered its judgment in Case C-521/21 (Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich) on 24 March 2026, holding that irregularities in the appointment of a judge do not, in themselves, suffice to establish a lack of independence. The Court ruled that only irregularities of such nature and seriousness as to create a real risk of external interference and reasonable doubt as to impartiality can undermine the requirement of a tribunal previously established by law. It further found that neither the participation of the reformed Polish National Council of the Judiciary nor the absence of an effective judicial remedy for unsuccessful candidates is sufficient, in itself or combined, to justify the recusal of a judge.
  6. The Constitutional Court of Albania held on 11 March 2026 that  a government decision to block the social media platform TikTok violated freedom of expression and press freedom.The Court determined that the government lacked a clear legal basis to impose a nationwide suspension of access to an online platform and that the measure was disproportionate.

In the News

  1. Italian voters rejected a constitutional reform of the judiciary in a referendum held on 22–23 March 2026, delivering a significant political setback to the government of Giorgia Meloni. The proposed reform sought, inter alia, to introduce the  separation of the careers of judges and prosecutors, restructure the High Council of the Judiciary, and establish a new disciplinary court. According to final results, approximately 54% of voters opposed the reform, with turnout close to 60%, reflecting strong public mobilisation. The outcome has been widely interpreted as both a vote on judicial reform and a broader political test of the government.
  2. Tens of thousands of protesters gathered in Prague on 21 March 2026 in what has been described as the largest anti-government demonstration since 2019, with organisers estimating participation at around 200,000–250,000 people. The protests  were driven by concerns over democratic backsliding, including proposed changes affecting public media, civil society, and institutional checks and balances. Demonstrators voiced strong support for democratic institutions, with many warning against developments perceived as aligning the country with broader regional trends challenging rule-of-law standards.
  3. A constitutional revision was adopted by the Algerian Parliament on 25 March 2026.  Key changes include introducing an educational requirement for presidential candidates, allowing early local elections, revising the composition of the Supreme Council of the Judiciary, extending the term of the head of the Council of the Nation to six years and expanding the powers of the election authority.
  4. The Bureau of the World Conference on Constitutional Justice held its 23rd meeting in Venice on 23 March 2026, under the auspices of the Venice Commission.The meeting brought together representatives of constitutional courts and regional and linguistic groups to discuss the ongoing activities of the Conference and its future development, including institutional coordination and proposals concerning the criteria for the integration of new member groups.
  5. The Venice Commission participated in a public hearing before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on 19 March 2026 in Brasília, addressing the question of whether democracy can be considered a human right. During the hearing, the President of the Venice Commission, Marta Cartabia, presented the Commission’s amicus curiae brief, which had been requested by the Inter-American Court in 2025.  

New Scholarship

  1. Valentina Rita Scotti, “The constitutional identity of Türkiye from Atatürk to Erdoğan: From exclusionary to illiberal in one century” (2026), International Journal of Constitutional Law (The article examines the evolution of Türkiye’s constitutional identity from its Kemalist, secular and nationalist foundations to the emergence of an increasingly illiberal model under the AKP. It argues that the shift reflects a broader transformation from an exclusionary constitutional framework to a form of competitive authoritarianism, shaped by strong state structures and deferential constitutional interpretation).
  2. Marieta Safta, “Is the Venice Commission the World’s De Facto Constitutional Court?” (2026), Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law (ICL Journal) (The article explores the evolving role of the Venice Commission in contemporary constitutionalism, arguing that its advisory opinions increasingly resemble forms of transnational constitutional adjudication. Drawing both on institutional practice and theoretical debates, including proposals for an international constitutional court, the contribution examines the Commission’s growing influence on constitutional standards and its potential quasi-judicial function in the European legal space).
  3. Amal Sethi, “Can Universities Advance Equity Under Constraint?” (2026), forthcoming in Archiv des Völkerrechts (Archives of International Law) (The article examines whether universities can advance equity in higher education in contexts of financial constraint, challenging the assumption that austerity necessarily leads to retrenchment. It argues that equity outcomes depend on institutional design, identifying structural features that enable some institutions to reduce disparities while others exacerbate them. The contribution further explores how public policy can support equity-oriented institutional models, while emphasising the limits of policy in the absence of sustained institutional commitment).
  4. Alain Zysset, Responding to Authoritarian Populism at the European Court of Human Rights: A Calibrated Framework (2026), Cambridge University Press (The book provides the first systematic account of how the European Court of Human Rights has responded, and could respond, to the rise of authoritarian populism across Council of Europe member states)

 Calls for Papers and Announcements

  1. The inaugural conference of the ICON-S Balkans will take place at the University of Belgrade Faculty of Law on 10–11 October 2026. The conference marks the launch of the regional ICON-S Balkans initiative and aims to bring together scholars working in constitutional and public law across South-East Europe. The abstract submissions deadline is 31 May 2026.
  2. The European Law Institute (ELI)  has recently expanded its network of national hubs with the establishment of the Romanian Hub, aimed at strengthening academic and professional engagement in European legal development at national level. The Hub forms part of ELI’s broader initiative to enhance collaboration and visibility across jurisdictions. More information is available here.
  3. The Summer School of the European System of Human Rights Protection – Council of Europe, EU, OSCE  will take place on 6–7 July 2026 in Frankfurt (Oder). The programme is aimed at students with a basic knowledge of public international law and an interest in human rights. Application deadlines are 15 April 2026 (for applicants requiring a visa) and 30 April 2026 (for all other applicants).
  4. The Black Sea and Eastern Mediterranean Review has issued a call for abstracts for its 6th International Annual Conference, co-organised together with the Interdisciplinary Laboratory for Black Sea and Mediterranean Studies (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki), the School of Law of the University of Nicosia, and the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung. The conference, titled “The global (ex) ‘periphery’ re-claiming its historical significance: Africa, South America and Eastern Mediterranean architecture under transformation,” will take place on 31 October–1 November 2026 in Thessaloniki, Greece. Abstracts should be submitted by 30 April 2026.
  5. Registration for the ICON-S CEE 2026 Conference, to be held on 14–15 May 2026 in Ljubljana, will open on 1 April 2026 and close on 15 April 2026. The conference will bring together scholars and practitioners in constitutional and public law from Central and Eastern Europe. The detailed programme will be published on the conference website in due course.

Elsewhere Online

  1.  M. Fatih Taşçı & M. Emre Hayyar, “Another Click in the Wall: A Legal Analysis of the Proposed Turkish Social Media Ban for Children” (Verfassungblog, 23 March 2026).
  2. The Court of Justice of the European Union, Video: Landmark Judgments on Environmental Protection (Curia Web TV, 23 March 2026)
  3. Vladan Petrov, “Serbia on the Eurpean Path, or “Something in between Somewhere in between” (Central and Eastern European Academy Law Blog, 5 March 2026)
  4. Sam Macintosh & Petra Butler, Pacific Common Market: Pathways, Pitfalls, and Constitutional Design (IACL-AIDC Blog, 24 March 2026)
  5. Jill Lepore, “Does A.I. Need a Constitution?” (The New Yorker, 23 March 2026)

Leave a Reply