Judicial Review of Technology-Related Laws

Abstract

This study addresses the issue of judicial review of the constitutionality of laws regulating modern technologies, given the contradiction between the rapid pace of technological development and the relatively slow pace of amending constitutional texts. It asserts that relatively rigid constitutions are best suited for democratic states because they guarantee the supremacy of the constitution and allow for partial amendments that keep pace with changes without compromising the spirit of the charter. The study clarifies the shift in the role of the constitutional judge from a "guardian of the literal text" to a "guarantor of intent" through the use of flexible interpretive tools: broad interpretation (extending privacy to data protection), intent-based interpretation (justice, freedom, dignity), and the anticipatory theory of privacy. The study reviewed comparative applications of judicial review in the areas of electronic surveillance (the Schrems and German BVerfG rulings), artificial intelligence (the European AI Act 2024 and the principle of human oversight), and cryptocurrencies (the US-China contrast). It concluded that effective constitutional review requires strict proportionality standards, clear objective responsibility, and integrated human oversight, with the possibility of granting AI a limited digital personality to facilitate redress. The study recommended the adoption of flexible, pre-established review standards by the legislature, enhanced international cooperation to harmonize standards, and the proposal of a “digital constitution” that defines the limits of responsibility and protection in the digital age. Finally, it emphasized that the future of fundamental rights depends on the ability of constitutional courts to balance technological innovation with the core of enduring constitutional values.