Legisprudence Limitations on Constitutional Amendments? Reflections on The Czech Constitutional Court’s Declaration of Unconstitutional Constitutional Act
Abstract Can a constitutional norm be unconstitutional? This idea seems, at first sight as a self-contradiction. Unconstitutionality is commonly referred to those ordinary laws, inferior to the constitution, which violate it. Constitutional norms, in contrast, carry an equal normative status as the constitution itself and other constitutional provisions. The question of unconstitutional constitutional norms recently arose in the Czech Republic. On 10 September 2009, the Czech Constitutional Court declared Constitutional Act no 195/2009 Coll, on Shortening the Fifth Term of Office of the Chamber of Deputies to be unconstitutional. The Czech Constitutional Court held that the constitutional act was an individual, specific decision and retroactive, thus violating the unamendability provision (Art 9(2)) in the Constitution, which prohibits amendments to the essential requirement for a democratic state governed by the rule of law. This article analyses the Czech Constitutional Court’s decision in a broader comparative and theoretical perspective and focuses, mainly, on four issues: first, the Czech Constitutional Court’s authority to substantively review constitutional norms; second, the appropriate standard of review when exercising judicial review of constitutional norms; third, the ‘individual, specific’ character of the constitutional act; and fourth, its alleged retroactive application. The article claims that while the Czech Constitutional Court was generally correct in claiming an authority to substantively review even constitutional norms, this was not the appropriate case in which to annul a constitutional act.
The Supreme Court versus the constitution : a challenge to federalism
What Our Past Has Taught Us - I K Gujral The Supreme Court Versus the Constitution - Pran Chopra PART ONE: PERSPECTIVES Basic Structure - N R Madhav Menon After Thirty Years The Constitution, Parliament and the Judiciary - P P Rao 'The Doctrine' Versus 'Majoritarianism' - Fali Nariman The Court, the Constitution and the People - Salman Khurshid 'The Doctrine' Versus the Sovereignty of the People - Subhash Kashyap The Constitution and 'Due Process' - S K Dholakia 'Due Process' or 'Procedure Established by Law'? - Ajay K Mehra Is the 'Doctrine' the Obstacle? - P K Dave Anomalies of the 'Doctrine' - R K P Shankardass Federalism Revisited - A M Ahmadi India's Judiciary - Pratap Bhanu Mehta The Promise of Uncertainty A 'Loose' Doctrine - K C Pant A Judicial Commission? - Ramaswamy R Iyer The Supreme Court, Parliament and the Constitution - Ajit Mozoomdar PART TWO The Ideal Remedy - Soli Sorabjee A Valediction PART THREE Review and Response - Pran Chopra
Pharmacokinetics of amikacin and chloramphenicol in the aqueous humor of rabbits
Composite data describing ocular pharmacokinetics are unreliable because of intersubject variation. To address this problem, an animal model was developed in which multiple aqueous samples from single subjects were obtained. Following direct anterior chamber or intravenous administration of amikacin or chloramphenicol, pharmacokinetic analysis of drug concentrations in the serum and anterior chamber was performed by using a nonlinear least-squares regression program. The number of anterior chamber paracenteses performed did not alter the beta elimination rates or percent penetration into the anterior chamber. The aqueous humor and peripheral-compartment terminal slopes were identical. These data indicate that complete ocular concentration-time curves can be obtained without altering antibiotic pharmacokinetics. Following direct injection into the anterior chamber, the elimination rates for both antibiotics followed a one-compartment model, whereas those following intravenous administration best fit an open, first-order, two-compartment model. Following intravenous administration, the anterior chamber elimination rate constants for both drugs were equal to that of the serum and significantly longer than that following direct injection. The elimination rates of both drugs following direct injection were similar. Systemic administration resulted in drug levels in aqueous humor that persisted longer than those following direct injection. Chloramphenicol, a lipophilic compound, gave higher mean concentrations in aqueous humor than did amikacin. Our model provides a new approach which rigorously examines ocular pharmacokinetics and provides data which suggest that for selected compounds the parenteral route of administration is preferable.