Problem of Interpretation of Constitutional Norms in the Constitutional Court’s Hypo Case

In this paper, the author analyses from the aspect of constitutional law a part of the Decision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia No. U-III-4149/2014 of July 24, 2015, relating to the method of interpretation of constitutional provisions stipulating non-limitation of offenses of war profiteering and criminal acts in the process of transformation and privatization committed during the Homeland War and peaceful reintegration as well as in the state of war and immediate threat to the independence and territorial integrity of the country. Fundamental opinion represented in the paper is that the respective part of the Constitutional Court’s Decision is founded on a selective rather than a holistic interpretation of the alleged constitutional norm. That interpretation is in its relevant part based on a completely wrong presumption that some of those offenses are not barred by the statute of limitations pursuant to criminal law regulations being in force before the constitutional reform of the year 2010. Because of that misinterpretation, according to the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia, it can be deduced that the provision on non-limitation of the above stated offenses can be applied to some of the listed offenses, which is legally unfounded. Apart from that, the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Croatia has changed the character of the part of the principle of legality in criminal law relating to the law on the statute of limitations, although this lies within the exclusive jurisdiction of the framers of the Constitution