Commented rejection and absence decisions in constitutional jurisdiction

Constitutions are legal texts organizing the fundamental foundation and functions of the state and individuals? basic right and freedoms. Therefore, the functioning of all state organs must be in harmony with the constitution.Legislative organs entitled to set the general rules among state organs must also act in harmony with the constitution like other state organs. However, the legislative organ can, for some reasons, set norms conflicting with the constitutions. Constitutional Courts are established in order to review the compliance of such norms with the constitution.The Constitutional Courts, at the end of their reviews, makes some decisions to ensure the compliance of legislative organ?s actions subject to review. ?commented rejection? and ?absence? decisions covered in our thesis are among such decisions.Commented rejection decision is a form of functional decision because it ensures compliance with the constitution without making any deciding for cancellation and remedy the legal problems that might arise as a result of cancellation of the norm. Commented rejection decisions are also important to ensure the validation of the presumption in relation to the compliance of norms with the constitution.Absence decision is a sanction that should be given in case of very explicit inconsistencies with the constitution, with outcomes much heavier than the cancellation decision. Therefore, this is a decision that should be made under exceptional conditions as also revealed in our thesis.Our thesis consists of three sections. The firs section generally focuses on constitutional jurisdiction and the Turkish Constitutional Jurisdiction. The second section studies rejection decision and the third section studies absence decisions.