Recently, in Russia, the publication of dissenting and concurring opinions in constitutional justice has been widely discussed by both lawyers and public. The paper emphasizes that the separate opinion of a judge of the Constitutional Court is a democratic institution and helps to increase the openness and transparency of constitutional review in post-communist countries in particular.
The publication of dissenting and concurring opinions of judges of the Constitutional Court strengthens trust in constitutional values. On the one hand, a judge exercises the right to freedom of speech and information, draws attention to legal issues. Subsequently, the position of a judge may become a ratio decidendi for a future decision of the Constitutional Court of Russia, as was already the case. On the other hand, as an act of a judge’s creativity, a separate opinion should take into account the consequences of its publication, and cannot undermine the credibility of the judiciary.