Constitutional Courts and the “Ne ultra petita” Principle: Preliminary Study and Foreign Experiences

Abstract

This article aims to explore the “Ne ultra petita” principle as a legal phenomenon and a universally recognised judicial practice that remains subjected to disputes regarding its definitions and acceptance, particularly within the Thai constitutional jurisprudence. It begins by providing relevant definitions and theories regarding the principle. It then examines case studies from Indonesia, India, Colombia and Germany, which demonstrate recognized exceptions to the principle in constitutional rulings. This article utilises a qualitative methodology through a literature review of relevant sources. 

           The study finds that deviations from the principle may be justified in cases concerning legal vacuum and a state’s failure in fulfilling duties, which seriously undermine public interests and rights. This is also the case in upholding constitutional supremacy when national interest and self-determination are at stake.

           Nonetheless, this study reveals that research on the “Ne ultra petita” principle remains scarce, either concerning country-specific and area-focused or comparative analyses. I hope that these findings will serve to expand the scholarly frontier and provide practical knowledge applicable to judicial decision-making and the review of relevant legal provisions.