Legislative Deviation as a Defect of Constitutional Legitimacy: A Comparative Study

Abstract

The constitution is the basic document that all state authorities are obligated to work with, and it also represents the top of the legal system in it. Here comes the idea of ​​constitutionalism, which means that all legislation and decisions in the state are issued in conformity with the provisions and principles of the constitution, so they do not contradict or contradict them, and consequently give rise to the idea of ​​censorship. On the constitutional legitimacy carried out by the constitutional judiciary represented by the Federal Supreme Court which is entrusted with the constitution itself The task of ensuring its protection from all forms and forms of persecution, as it imposed strict judicial control over the constitutionality of laws and to clarify what constitutional flaws it might encounter leading to its revocation and cancellation, and the duty it performs to interpret constitutional texts is binding on all authorities and individuals in the state.

                   In the light of the principle of the supremacy of the constitution, the legislative authority should seek through its actions to achieve the public interest, but this perception is nothing but an assumption that may not be consistent with reality. In fact, the legislator often resorts to disguised and disguised contravention of the constitution and exploits his discretion to put in place legislation that appears to be correct and inwardly invalid, and here appears the defect of legislative deviation, which this study attempts to demonstrate its types and the position of jurisprudence and the constitutional judiciary on it.