Keywords: constitutional justice; Constitutional Court; plenum; Extended Chamber of SAC; Grand Chamber of SC; consistency of case law; judicial review of legal norms; constitutional complaint
Abstract: The article deals with reflections on the role of the plenum of the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic as regards its competence to guarantee the consistency of the case law. At the same time, the article represents a polemic review of the monograph of O. Kadlec on the role of grand chambers at the supreme courts. The author of the article, who worked in various positions at the Constitutional Court (legal assistant, head of the analytical department, secretary general), acknowledges the conclusions of the monograph that the plenum obtained extensive powers and high expectations which cannot be satisfied in practice. This is due both to the composition of the plenum, which incorporates all 15 judges of the Constitutional Court, and to the fact that the plenum is authorized not only to guarantee the consistency of the case law of the Constitutional Court’s senates, but – and above all – to decide in the proceedings concerning the judicial review of legal norms. Therefore, making the case law of senates consistent has been considered secondary and less important. The author tries to examine other causes of this situation and considers possible solutions.