Procedural Rights and Obligations of Parties in Constitutional Court Proceedings: International Experience and National Perspectives

This article critically examines the procedural rights and obligations of parties involved in constitutional court proceedings through a comparative legal perspective. Drawing on the experiences of Germany, the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, and France, it analyzes key procedural safeguards such as access to case materials, legal representation, participation via video conferencing, amicus curiae submissions, and enforcement of judicial decisions. The paper also explores Uzbekistan’s constitutional framework, highlighting normative limitations and institutional gaps in guaranteeing party rights. The study argues that procedural rights are not merely formal tools but foundational instruments for constitutional justice, transparency, and the rule of law. Recommendations include expanding direct access to the Constitutional Court, enhancing participatory mechanisms, introducing procedural innovations like discovery and public oversight, and aligning national law with global best practices. These proposals aim to strengthen legal certainty and public trust in constitutional adjudication in Uzbekistan.