Freedom of the press and journalistic freedom are at the core of the freedom of expression as a fundamental human right and democratic value. Its impor- tance for democracy appears obvious and indisputable. It presupposes the right of public to be informed, which stands in the function of democratic con- trol over the state powers. Among the most important elements of free press and journalistic freedom stands the journalists’ right to protect their sources of information. Even though the legal and judicial recognition and protection of this rights is not new, and the same goes for the problem of the so-called chilling effect produced by the intrusions in such right one must not consider it as a self-evident matter, or as a finally resolved concept. Firstly, because in- fringement of this right occurs daily. Secondly, because its dimensions and em- phases are in constant flux due to different circumstances and particularities of concrete cases at hand. Thirdly, effective legal protection and quality exercise of such right rests on determining the exceptions when the intrusion is legally acceptable and the criteria for such deeds. This observation arises from judicial decision-making, especially the ECHR case-law, which is analysed in this ar- ticle. The decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Slovenia should be observed in such a spirit since it represents the first judicial conceptualisation of discussed right in Slovenian legal system. The author concludes by doctrinal assessment on the extension and limits of this right.

Keywords: freedom of expression, freedom of the press, rights of journalists, protection of journalist sources, chilling effect.

The doctrine of an unconstitutional constitutional amendment is considered a special, controversial topic of constitutional law theory. In recent years, several books have been written and published on this topic. The author emphasises that in the last twenty years he has not significantly changed his view of this doctrine and its constitutional applicability. The article outlines the develop- ment of this doctrine and the problem of rejecting any serious discussion of this doctrine in the domestic legal environment. He draws attention to the fact that the Slovenian Constitutional Court continues to reject this doctrine with- out providing a single sentence on the reasons—argumentation. The article concludes with an indication of the cases in which, in the author’s opinion, this doctrine should be applied.

Keywords: unconstitutional constitutional amendment doctrine, constitutional court, Council of Europe Member States, foundational constitutional democracy, constitution.