Tokens: 45
.
The
third
criterion
given
by
the
Constitutional
Court
,
“
the
existence
of
dissenting
opinions
,
especially
if
fuelled
by
robust
arguments
”
,
is
no
less
problematic
.
On
the
one
hand
,
the
“
robustness
”
of
the
arguments
seems
too
much
of
a
subjective
evaluation
for
it
to
be
considered
a
serious
indication
of
the
binding
nature
of
a
ruling
–
or
,
as
in
this
case
,
of
the
non
-
binding
nature
of
its
opposite
reasoning
.
On
the
other
hand
,
and
more
fundamentally
,
dissenting
opinions
do
not
demean
in
any
way
the
legal
force
of
the
judgments
to
which
they
are
appended
.
Furthermore
,
considering
that
dissenting
opinions
diminish
in
any
way
the
legal
force
of
judgments
would
be
vesting
individual
judges
with
a
power
they
can
not
logically
have
,
or
be
intended
to
have
,
within
a
collegial
organ
such
as
the
Court
.
Labels: O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O