Karakamisheva-There are five violations of the Constitution and four of the law

Karakamisheva-Constitutional Court expected to be public feud – There are five violations of the Constitution and four of the law

The Constitutional Court is expected to poke fun at the public scene… but the truth about this parliamentary decision remains to be written.

The decision is unconstitutional because:

1. It contains a manipulative and confusing referendum issue containing a treaty that has not yet entered into force in the country. Art. 52 of the Constitution states that laws and other regulations are published in the Official Gazette before they enter into force. The Law on Ratification of the Prespa Treaty has not yet been published in the Official Gazette, as it has not been signed by the President of the Republic. In Art. 51 of the Constitution states that in the Republic of Macedonia the laws must be in accordance with the Constitution and all other regulations with the Constitution and the law.

2. The Treaty is contrary to the Constitution, because it regulates issues of changing the state name other than the constitution, defines change of the whole legal, political and social system contrary to the Constitution of the Republic of Macedonia,

3. The contract is concluded contrary to the Constitution by an unauthorized person. Dimitrov is not authorized to sign such a contract, plus the entire procedure of its conclusion has been violated,

4. A question that is contrary to the Constitution and international law cannot be put to a referendum!

The decision is illegal because:

1. It is not stated under which article of the law such a decision is made and a referendum is called,

2. The referendum question is manipulative, multifaceted and confusing to the citizens,

3. The decision does not specify the type of referendum, whether it is a consultation with citizens such as Zaev’s public words or citizens‘ decision-making.

4. It is not known whether citizens are consulting or deciding what is the most important aspect of applying the referendum results,

5. The decision has no explanation of the referendum issue.


It writes: Prof. Tanja Karakamisheva, PhD, Professor of Constitutional Law and Political System at the Faculty of Law „Justinian I“ in Skopje