Candeia’s Justice system is provided for in the Constitutional Proposal and has not yet been established. This page explains the architecture and safeguards without presenting courts, judges or proceedings as already existing.
The Constitutional Court deals with questions such as the validity of a Candeian election, a conflict among institutions or a constitutional violation of internal rights. Its final word applies within Candeia’s legal order.
Final constitutional authority
A final decision within the Court’s jurisdiction does not depend on confirmation by another branch. Exceptional review by the Court itself may exist only in narrow circumstances — such as decisive procedural fraud, materially manipulated evidence or a serious defect in the panel’s composition — and not as a new political appeal.
Being final does not mean governing
The Court reviews legality and constitutionality and may order necessary remedies, but it does not choose policy, technology or an administrative solution when more than one constitutionally lawful alternative remains open. It does not direct the budget, elections, currency or technical architecture.
Odd-numbered panel and no victory by tie
The merits must be decided by an odd-numbered panel. The full court of nine is the rule; when lawful recomposition is impossible, a seven-member panel may sit. The Constitution rejects the idea that a tie or absence automatically preserves the challenged act.
How a question reaches the Court
There are constitutional complaints, abstract review and specific preventive reviews. A complaint cannot be blocked by a disproportionate economic barrier; exhaustion of ordinary remedies is waived when they are ineffective, inaccessible or incapable of preventing serious harm.
Basis: Arts. 232–240.
