Abstract
The article examines the preliminary constitutional control of laws as an effective tool for effective protection of the constitutional order, ensuring the unity of legislation and maintaining a balance of interests between the President and the branches of government in the legislative sphere. Modern legal systems, for various reasons and circumstances, contain many legislative acts that need timely and professional verification for constitutionality. The authors draw attention to the role of constitutional control, decisions of the Constitutional Council, which act as a means by which the stability of the political system is ensured, as well as to the shortcomings when the Constitutional Council is given the opportunity to indirectly "invade" the competence of the legislator if the law is recognized as inconsistent with the Constitution. Constitutional control obliges the legislator and other participants in the legislative process not only to comply with the norms and principles of the Constitution, but also imposes certain restrictions, taking into account political practice. Declaring an act of Parliament unconstitutional is one of the forms of constitutional responsibility. It is concluded that control in this area should be considered as an indicator of the quality of the work of the highest authorities involved in the legislative process. Attention is drawn to the determination of the legal nature of the act of the Constitutional Council, in the order of preliminary control, which recognizes the law adopted by the Parliament as inappropriate, but which has not entered into legal force. It is also concluded that different legal traditions in practice have given rise to different interpretations of the concept of "unconstitutionality", and the main differences mainly relate to the forms of control and the consequences of decisions taken.