La justice constitutionnelle au Maroc : contribution à la théorie générale de la juridiction constitutionnelle
Institution:
Paris 2Disciplines:
Directors:
Abstract EN:
This study, which extends beyond the special case of morocco, attempts to provide an answer to the following two questions concerning constitutional law's science: 1)is a constitutional court indispensable? 2) how necessary is constitutional judge made law, how far is it legitimate and possible and what is its value? the answer to the first question is yes, since a constitutional court is the best means of introducing law into politica into the political machinery. This view-point is confirmed by the historical, scientific and technical evolution of this nevertheless, in morocco, the existence of a constitutional court does not have this result, due to the particular signi of constitutional law, which is the law of the political authority, and to the role played by the judge in the constitutional order, which is the instrument of this political authority. The aim of this study is therefore to put right constitutional law, seen as a factor and condition of individual and collective progress, by means of a constitutional court which would first have to be adapted to its function. Even under these conditions, the competent court leads to constitutional judge made law, the necessity, legitimacy and value of which are far from being a priori sure. This is even more so in the case of a deficient public and constitutional law, as confirmed through the critical analysis of the answers provided by constitutional judge made law in morocco. The cases that may lead to the formation of law by means of judge made law should be dealt with by the constitution maker and by the legislator and not by the judge, since this is not logically or legally of his competence. The general conclusion offers a definition of constitutional justice which provides both a synthesis of this study and a contribution to the general theory of the constitutional court.
Abstract FR:
Au-dela du cas particulier du maroc, cette etude tente de repondre a ces deux questions generales de la science du droit constitutionnel: 1) la juridiction constitutionnelle est-elle indispensable? 2)quelle peut etre la necessite, la legitimite, la possibilite et la valeur de la jurisprudence constitutionnelle? la reponse a la premiere question est affirmative car la juridiction constitutionnelle est le meilleur moyen pour introduire le droit dans la vie et l'appareil politiques. Ce point de vue est confirme par l'evolution historique, scientifique et technique de cette institution. Cependant, l'existence d'une juridiction constitutionnelle au maroc n'aboutit pas a ce resultat en raison de la signific ation particuliere du droit constitutionnel, qui est le droit du pouvoir, et du role particulier joue par le juge dans l'ordre constitutionnel, qui est l'instrument de ce pouvoir. Cette etude propose donc de remettre sur pieds le droit constitutionnel, concu comme un facteur et une condition du progres individuel et collectif, au moyen de la juridiction constitutionnelle prealablement adaptee a sa fonction. Meme dans ces conditions, la juridiction conduit a la jurisprudence constitutionnelle dont la necessite, la legitimite et la valeur sont loin d'etre certaines a priori. A plus forte raison en sera-t-il ainsi dans le cadre d'un droit public et constitutionnel defectueux comme le confirmera l'analyse critique des solutions de la jurisprudence constitutionnelle du maroc. Les points pouvant conduire a la formation du droit par voie de jurisprudence devront etre traites par le constituant et le legislateur et non pas par le juge car cette creation ne fait pas partie juridiquement et logiquement de sa fonction. La conclusion generale proposera une definition de la justice constitutionnelle qui sera une synthese de cette etude et une contribution a la theorie generale de la juridiction constitutionnelle.