Shops in Croatia will continue to operate only 16 Sundays a year, according to the decision of the Constitutional Court. Due to significant public interest, the Constitutional Court even organized a press conference, where the court president Miroslav Šeparović explained how the institution did not accept the proposal for the assessment of the conformity of the trade law by a majority of 10 votes. Judges Andrej Abramović, Lovorka Kušan, and Goran Selanec voted against and announced dissenting opinions. Supporting dissenting opinions were announced by judges Ingrid Antičević Marinović, Branko Brkić, and Miroslav Šumanović.
– Regarding the Trade Law, we have decided twice on the so-called non-working Sunday. In 2004, we abolished that law due to inequality in treatment depending on the size of the sales area. The second time we abolished it because the goal intended to be achieved by prohibiting work on Sundays was not explained. In the legal order of the Republic of Croatia, Sunday is considered a day of rest, and the regulation of working hours depends on the free will of the legislator. The government stated that the goal is to achieve a balance between the private and business lives of workers, ensuring quality of life and social welfare. For us, this is a legitimate goal – Šeparović explained the court’s decision, asserting that neither traders, nor workers, nor consumers suffer an excessive burden from this solution.
Reactions to the Constitutional Court’s decision are ongoing.
The Croatian Employers’ Association also reacted, stating that they regret the Constitutional Court’s decision and continue to warn about the negative impact of limiting entrepreneurs’ work on the overall economy and labor market.
– We believe that working on Sundays should be left to the choice of employers while respecting all legal obligations and adequately paying workers, and we oppose interventions in the working hours of entrepreneurs. Such a law is simultaneously unviable, rigid, and discriminatory as it provides many exceptions that lead to inequality in the market, completely ignoring the real dynamics of modern life and the needs of citizens. A fair market competition implies that the rules are the same for everyone, and the situation with small family traders, as well as with small towns and islands where citizens have no choice, is particularly concerning – they warned in HUP.
On behalf of the Voice of Entrepreneurs, which requested the assessment of constitutionality, Hrvoje Bujas reacted, briefly stating for Lider that they somewhat expected such a decision and that they have the impression that the government was also confident this time that the Constitutional Court would support them.
