The Constitutionality of Tax and Social Legislation: An Analysis of Recent Slovenian Empirical Data

Abstract

The concept of the rule of law encompasses the regulation of rights and obligations, as well as their enforcement as materia legis. This is particularly relevant in administrative relations, where public and private legal interests often come into conflict. Laws create legal norms, which are constitutionally consistent only if they do not infringe upon human rights and fundamental freedoms. In the Republic of Slovenia, the Constitutional Court, acting as a negative legislator, is responsible for assessing the constitutionality of laws, particularly in the administrative field, most often through a combination of constitutional review and constitutional complaints in administrative cases. This study analyses cases of constitutional complaints arising from original administrative procedures over a ten-year period, from 2014 to 2024, in Slovenian constitutional case law. The research addresses especially the tax and social field, as constitutional unconformity is established most frequently in these areas. Special emphasis is dedicated to procedural safeguards that tackle constitutional rights, such as the right to be heard and the right to appeal. The main findings endorse the role of the Constitutional Court as a negative legislator, being crucial in limiting the tendency of the Executive to conduct administrative proceedings efficiently at the expense of constitutional guarantees. The findings aim to provide lessons not only for Slovenian regulators but also for those in other countries and comparative analyses across the region.