Özet:

Judicial review in fact experiences democratic legitimacy problem. Because they have the authority which is composed of control and sanction of political choices of Anayurt, Ömer, Sakarya Üniversitesi, Anayasa Hukuku Doçenti. legislation institution which has the quality of democratic representation. As long as the dilemna of superiority of parliament - superiority of constitution continues the problem of legitimacy will in a way continue as well. If the marginal views that they would not relate with the theory of democracy is not taken into regard, constitutional review is now considered as a means to perform restricted managament and mentions its democratic legitimacy in the scope of protecting freedom. In the countries which have adopted European constitutional judgment model that is based on the constitutional control via a court that is specially authorized apart from general judgment, the composition of this court is given special importance. Detecting the members of court, required conditions for the membership, durations of duty, safety of duty and the state of incoherency to the duty are considered under the title of constitutional courts’ composition. It is especially seen that they differ from general judgment due to these principles. In this article, it is aimed to put forward constitutional courts’ composition in European Union countries and discussions about this in the scope of comparative law and the relationship between the composition of courts and their democratic legitimacy

Anahtar Kelimeler: