Abstract

The aim of this paper is to offer some insights on how the 15 judges of the Constitutional Court operate, in order to disclose their approach to individual and collective responsibilities. After a brief introduction on a few autobiographical notes, attention is devoted to the concept of reasonableness, repeatedly adopted in the Court’s rulings, and to its close relation to the principle of equality. A few examples are selected with a view to explaining the legal techniques behind deliberations. Consistency and rigor are the key words leading to responsibility and to the strengthening of independency as a pre-requisite for binding deliberations.