Core rule
Article 41 permits limits on rights only by law and only to the extent necessary to protect the constitutional order, the rights and freedoms of others, national security, public order, public health, and public morality.
This is not permission to limit rights for administrative convenience. In each case, there should be a legal basis, a constitutionally listed aim, and a clear link between the measure and that aim. Restrictions for political motives are expressly prohibited.
Questions to ask in a concrete case
- Who imposed the restriction and under which law?
- Which Article 41 aim does it pursue?
- Is the measure broader than necessary for that aim?
- What is the route and deadline for challenge?
A law may regulate peaceful assemblies or introduce sanitary measures. But calling a measure “security” does not by itself make it constitutional: its content, necessity, and scope can be challenged.
Rights that cannot be limited
The Constitution gives an exact list. Rights and freedoms in Articles 12, 14, 16, 17, 20, 22, 25 may not be limited in any circumstances.
These include legal personality and judicial protection, protection of citizens abroad, equality and non-discrimination, the right to life, dignity and freedom from torture, the choice of nationality and use of a native language, and freedom of conscience. Read the relevant article for the precise scope: protection covers its full text, not only a short label.
How a restriction is reviewed
An ordinary court reviews the legality of a decision or action in a specific case. If a normative act that must be applied infringes constitutional rights, the court must suspend proceedings and refer the act to the Constitutional Court under Article 79. A citizen may also apply to the Constitutional Court when the admissibility conditions in the constitutional law are met.