Cardozo Law Review
Abstract
Appellants claim that the National Brotherhood and Sisterhood Youth Organization Act (the "Act") and its implementation violate their constitutional rights to liberty (especially their rights to freedom of religion, freedom of conscience, and freedom of speech), equality, and tolerance. Article 1 of the Harmonia Constitution sets "constitutional standards" for "all legislation." These standards are of a different nature and are somewhat redundant. Some of them can be interpreted in terms of classical constitutional rights in the seven reference legal systems. "Liberty" stands for the classical freedoms: personal freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, and criminal law and its procedural guarantees. "Equality" refers to its counterparts in the different forms of the equal protection/nondiscrimination clauses. "Solidarity" and "tolerance" govern the interpretation of, and the balancing between, conflicting rights. Solidarity can also be understood as the "social clause" in the Harmonia Constitution. Violation of the tolerance standard implicitly assumes the violation of another constitutional right. Thus, a separate scrutiny of infringement of the right to tolerance is hardly possible. The question is whether the Act, while fulfilling its aim to teach tolerance, results in an imbalance that impinges on other constitutional rights. This question must be decided in light of the tolerance principle.
Disciplines
Law
Recommended Citation
László Sólyom,
Opinion of Justice Sólyom,
18
Cardozo L. Rev.
1725
(1997).
Available at:
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/clr/vol18/iss5/7