ABSTRACT
Law-making was always present in the activity of the Hungarian Constitutional Court (CC). Explicit law-making activity relates its Rules of Procedure, while law-making by constitutional interpretation has significant practice by way of informal constitutional amendments. On the sub-constitutional level, the most powerful indirect effect on the content of the legal system is related to the Court`s classic role of ‘negative legislator.’ However, in the ruling part of the decisions the Court can also declare legislative omissions and formulate constitutional requirements, tools of manifest and direct law-making activity by constitutional and legal interpretation. Since 2012, the Court turns more often to these legal consequences instead of annulling the challenged legislation. A plausible explanation for this tendency could be the Court’s intention not to enter into direct conflicts with the political powers. This chapter analyses the practice of the Court related to ‘positive law-making considerations,’ informal constitutional amendments, legislative omissions, and constitutional requirements.
