11.09.2026
As a part of a joint public legal education project of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and the National School of Judges of Ukraine, a thematic online lecture entitled “Constitutional Review in Portuguese Republic” was held on 3 September 2026. The keynote speaker was Mariana Rodrigues Canotilho, an expert in European constitutional law and a Judge of the Constitutional Court of the Portuguese Republic (hereinafter, the “Court”).
The Judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine Viktor Gorodovenko, Oleksandr Vodiannikov and Galyna Yurovska attended the event, as well as judges from judicial system, prosecutors, lawyers, scientist, lecturers, postgraduate students, law students, and the youngest researches – students of the Junior Academy of Science.
During the presentation, the lecturer provided a detailed overview of the historical evolution of the Portuguese model of constitutional review (from the Constitution of 1911 to the reforms of 1976 and 1982), the specific features of the formation of the Court’s composition, as well as the peculiarities of its jurisdiction and organization.
Mariana Canotilho emphasised that the judicial review in Portugal emerged 70 years before the Court itself was established. The constitutional review body was established in 1982 as an arbiter of constitutional compromise, rather than as a classical tool for protecting the rights of individuals, given the absence of an individual complaint mechanism (amparo). The Court consists of 13 judges, elected through a special procedure for a single non-renewable nine-year term: 10 judges are elected by Parliament, while three are co-opted by the 10 judges already elected by Parliament. The Judges have a special immunity regime.
The speaker outlined the categories of people entitled to bring cases before the Court, as well as the types and specific features of constitutional review in Portugal. As noted, the Constitution of Portugal empowers all courts to decline to apply provisions that are contrary to the Constitution or the principles enshrined therein. Every court has direct access to the Constitution of Portugal in any case falling within its jurisdiction, both with regard to substantive and procedural matters. Such review is conducted by ex officio principle: reviewing the law applicable to the case is an obligation, rather than a matter of judicial discretion.
The Constitution allows any norm to be subjected to review. In this regard, the Court has developed its own functional concept of what constitutes a “norm”. It encompasses any act adopted in the exercise of public regulatory power that forms the objective legal order, or any act issued in the appropriate normative form. The Court does not review purely executive acts of public authorities, including judicial decisions and administrative acts, political acts, or internal administrative rules. At the same time, the Court reviews acts having the force of law, regardless of whether they are general or abstract or specific and individual. This broader approach has expanded the range of acts subject to review and indirectly strengthened the protection of fundamental rights, without, however, transforming the Court into an amparo court.
In addition to its core judicial functions, the Court oversees the financial reporting and activities of political parties and the assets of public officials, adjudicates electoral disputes, and has the exclusive authority to officially clarify the death of the President of the Republic and declare the President physically incapacitated where such incapacity prevents the discharge of presidential duties, among other functions.
The speaker focused on four types of constitutional review and explained the mechanism through which they operate:
- prior review (conducted before an act is signed; encompasses only provisions of international treaties or agreements and decrees that formally have the force of law);
- abstract subsequent review (any norm currently in force, as well as norms that have ceased to have effect, may be subject to such review; both constitutionality and legality are examined);
- concrete review (concerns the constitutional dimension of a norm or its interpretation, rather than the judicial decision itself; it is conducted in the context of a specific disputed as an appeal to the Court on a constitutional issue);
- review of legislation omissions (concerns the failure to adopt measures that the Constitution of Portugal directly requires to be adopted).
In this context, the speaker referred to a number of judicial precedents.
Analyzing the possibility of drawing on Portugal’s experience, the Judge emphasised that such elements as the direct applicability of the Constitution of Portugal by all judges, a nine-year non-renewable term of office for a judge, the publication of separate opinions, the election of the Court’s leadership by the Court itself, and the appointment of judges by a supermajority, as well as the possibility of reviewing any norm, including one that has ceased to have effect, and the availability of prior review, have proven highly effective. At the same time, the speaker cautioned against certain problematic functions, such as electoral jurisdiction and auditing the financing of political parties, which consume significant institutional resources and would be better entrusted to other bodies, as well as the review of internal decisions of political parties, which has limited practical value.
The event concluded with a question-and-answer session. The Judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine expressed their gratitude to Mariana Canotilho for the insightful lecture, which provided an opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of Portugal’s experience of constitutional review. They emphasised that the support of international colleagues demonstrates that Ukraine is not alone in facing its challenges, and that the professional exchange of experience is of immense value for the further development of Ukraine’s constitutional jurisdiction.
Video recording of the lecture is available: https://youtu.be/BHxLDuF-4G8
