Preliminary decision of the Constitutional Court on the NATO summit: Argumentally weak resolution recorded to the president

The Constitutional Court's decision on Pavel's participation in NATO is argumentatively extremely weak and contradictory (note how I avoid the term "stupid" in the case of the honorable ÚS). Judge for yourself. According to ÚS:

Deciding on the competences of the government/president is "complex" and doing so hastily is "irresponsible"

..but still we order that the president will simply go to the NATO summit despite the government

..because... uh... how to justify it... presidents used to go there too

What kind of argument is this, constitutional judges??

It has no legal weight - constitutional competence cannot be defined by customary practice.

In fact, he is completely out of line - in the past there was no major contradiction between the positions of the government and the president on NATO, there was no reason not to take him there; now exists and therefore the question arose for the first time whether the president can force participation in the summit DESPITE his different position vis-à-vis the government.

With this "preliminary" decision, the Ús clearly anticipates, one might say replaces, the decision on the matter itself (which, according to his own words, he does not dare to make in the short term due to "complexity") - because if he later decided on competences differently than in this key "preliminary", he would be completely disabled publicly; in fact, this IS a decision in the competence matter itself - just without justification and any constitutional argumentation.

If the Ús issues such weak (again, I avoid the word "stupid") justifications in fundamental matters, it will not avoid accusations that it makes political decisions, regardless of the Constitution. That it just suits Pavlo. And these accusations are sure to come…