Constitutional pluralism in international law: interaction between national constitutional values and international obligations

This study analyzes the interaction and potential conflicts between national constitutional values and international obligations within the context of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan. The relevance of the research stems from the growing influence of international obligations, deeper integration processes, and increasing external impact on national legal systems. The primary objective is to identify possible contradictions between international legal norms and national constitutional principles and to explore mechanisms for their reconciliation. The core idea is to preserve national values through selective incorporation of international norms. The scientific and practical significance lies in justifying the use of a constitutional filtering mechanism when implementing international obligations. The study employs systemic, comparative-legal, historical-legal, and formal-logical methods. The analysis draws on the theory of constitutional pluralism, Germany’s “Solange” doctrine, the practice of the Constitutional Council of Kazakhstan, and foreign jurisprudence. The findings demonstrate that the application of international norms must not contradict fundamental national values such as sovereignty, territorial integrity, and protection of rights. The study concludes that maintaining legal balance requires selective acceptance of international obligations while safeguarding national constitutional identity. Its value lies in reassessing the relationship between international and national law. The practical relevance involves recommendations for improving legal policy, implementation tools, and constitutional review.

1. Qazaqstan Respublikasynyñ Konstitusiasy. 1995. URL: https://adilet.zan.kz/kaz/docs/K950001000 (ötınış berılgen kün: 26.12.2025) (In Kazakh)

2. Cassese A. (2005) International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 558 p. (In English)

3. Besselink L. (2021) Constitutional Pluralism. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press. 312 p. (In English)

4. Bundesverfassungsgericht. BVerfG, 2 BvR 1481/04, Urteil vom 14.10.2004. Karlsruhe: BVerfG, 2004. 28 p. (In English)

5. Raz J. (2019) The Authority of Law: Essays on Law and Morality. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 364 p. (In English)

6. Qazaqstan Respublikasy Konstitusiasynyñ 4-babynyñ normalaryn halyqaralyq ūiymdar men olardyñ organdarynyñ şeşımderın oryndau tärtıbıne qatysty qoldanysta resmi tüsındıru turaly. URL: https://adilet.zan.kz/kaz/docs/S090000006 (ötınış berılgen kün: 26.12.2025) (In Kazakh)

7. Tokobekov N.A. (2023) Konstitusialyq üstemdık jäne halyqaralyq qūqyqtyñ araqatynasy. Almaty: Jetı Jarğy. 276 b. (In Kazakh)

8. Von Bogdandy A., Schill S. (2018) Overcoming Absolute Sovereignty: Global Constitutionalism. Heidelberg: Springer. 332 p. (In English)

9. Peters A. (2019) Global Constitutionalism in a Nutshell // Utrecht Law Review. Vol. 15, no. 3. P. 15–35. (In English)

10. Stone Sweet A., Ryan C. (2018) A Cosmopolitan Legal Order: Constitutional Pluralism and Rights Adjudication. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 402 p. (In English)

11. Walker N. (2016) Constitutionalism and Pluralism Revisited // European Journal of Legal Studies. Vol. 9. No. 2. P. 105–132. (In English)

12. Wheatley S. (2019) The Idea of International Constitutionalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 288 p. (In English)