In the complex world of Congolese constitutional law, the recent Rconst 2259 judgment rendered by the Constitutional Court on May 31, 2024 is the subject of passionate debates among actors in the legal world. This judgment, which aroused mixed reactions, mainly raises the question of the competence of the Constitutional Court to censor the conformity of the judicial acts of other authorities, in particular the judgments of the Council of State.
Some critics question the power of the Constitutional Court to assume this jurisdiction, arguing that it should not replace other courts in assessing the conformity of their decisions with the Constitution. On the other hand, other voices are raised to support the courageous position of the High Court, highlighting the pivotal role of the constitutional judge in the protection of fundamental rights and procedural guarantees.
Indeed, the notion of praetorian power, inherited from Roman law, refers to the judge’s ability to create case law going beyond the text of the law or in its absence. It is a law-creating power that is essential to fill normative gaps and ensure equitable justice. The praetorian jurisdiction of the Congolese Constitutional Court is not new, since it is anchored in the 2006 Constitution and has been confirmed by several previous judgments.
One of the crucial aspects of this praetorian competence lies in the protection of fundamental rights against violations committed as a last resort, in particular by the judiciary. Indeed, in a rule of law, respect for the Constitution is required for all public acts, including court decisions. Violations of fundamental rights, whether emanating from the legislature, the executive or the judiciary, must be punished to guarantee the integrity of the legal system.
Faced with the major challenge represented by the protection of fundamental rights and procedural guarantees, the control of constitutionality appears to be an essential bulwark against abuse of power and violations of higher standards. It is imperative to distinguish between errors of judgment arising from a simple interpretation of the law and direct attacks on the Constitution, which require specific intervention by the Constitutional Court.
In conclusion, the question of the praetorian competence of the Constitutional Court in the Rconst 2259 judgment raises crucial issues for the protection of fundamental rights and the guarantee of fair justice in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It is essential to recognize the fundamental role of the constitutional judge in preserving the constitutional order and democratic values, ensuring that the rule of law is respected at all levels of society.