(UN)CONSTITUTIONALITY OF MANDATORY MEMBERSHIP IN THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

The paper analyses the constitutionality of mandatory membership in the Chamber of Commerce, introduced by the legislation in force in 2015, through the analysis of the positions expressed in the proposal for constitutionality assessment submitted by 47 members of parliament, the decision of the Constitutional Court on this issue and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights related to for freedom of association.

In particular, three key constitutionally relevant issues that arise in relation to the constitutionality of mandatory membership fees in the Chamber of Commerce were highlighted and addressed. First, is the freedom of association defined differently in the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia and the ECHR? The Constitution of the Republic of Serbia guarantees the right to stay out of any form of association, unlike the Convention, which does not guarantee this right explicitly and directly. This raises the question of whether the Constitution of the Republic of Serbia guarantees a higher level of the right to negative freedom of association than that guaranteed by the Convention? Second, does the Chamber of Commerce meet certain public law criteria and what are the consequences of the direct legal statement that the Chamber protects the private interests of its members, instead of public law interest? Third, in the present case, can the standards of ECtHR decisions Sigurður A. Sigurjónsson v. Iceland and Chassagnou v. France be applied to the disputed legal issue?