Abstract:
This research deals with a topic of great importance in terms of constitutional theory and
practice, namely the role of the principle of legal security in protecting acquired rights in the
event that a legal text is ruled unconstitutional. It is the right of individuals to be reassured
in their dealings with each other or with the state and public law persons that their legal
positions and their acquired rights arising from these dealings are stable; since the nature
of the ruling on the unconstitutionality of the revealing legal text requires the return of its
effects to the past. However, this constitutes a threat and a violation to the principle of legal
security. That requires necessary intervention of the constitutional or ordinary legislator to
balance between the principle of legal security and the principle of legality represented by the
effects of the ruling of unconstitutionality. It became clear that the Jordanian constitutional
legislator's handling of this matter was not at the level of comparative legislation. This requires
stipulating the principle of legal security as a constitutional principle, and determining the
effects of unconstitutionality ruling; in away as not to affect the legal positions and acquired
rights in light of the text that was ruled unconstitutional, taking into account the specificity of
the tax and penal texts in this case, similar to comparative legislation.
