| Summary: | Nordic Constitutions have both differences and similarities. This chapter explains certain key differences by reflecting legal-cultural and historical dimensions of living Nordic constitutional law. The underlying idea is to offer a thematic and comparative overview for a non-Nordic reader. First, the general comparative context of Nordic constitutions is explained shortly. Secondly, chosen key feature of each constitution is thematically highlighted. In Finland’s case, the focus is on the role of the parliament’s Constitutional Committee as the guardian of constitutionality. When it comes to Sweden, the focus is on the exceptionally central position of its parliament. Section for Norway explains the central role of the Supreme Court. Discussion on Denmark centres on national sovereignty. In the case of Iceland, the new creative manner of reforming constitution is addressed. Final section speaks of the Nordic experience – or “Nordicness” – and questions its future in the world of expanding judicial review. Peer reviewed
|
|---|