The research addresses the concept of legislative stability and its importance in achieving judicial security, which guarantees citizens and litigants the ability to predict justice in the judicial system. The research discusses the role of legislative stability in enhancing legal security, and indicates that stability is not only related to the number of legislative amendments or their topics, but also to the duration of the application of laws and the mechanism for their adoption. Studies also indicate that laws that remain in force for longer periods are more likely to be amended, and that laws that pass a parliamentary majority vote are less likely to change. However, there is no clear relationship between legislative stability and the ideological philosophy of the government or the method of enacting the law.
Previous studies have found that there is a difference between legislative stability in different electoral cycles, and that the longer the law is in force and applied, the more likely it is to be amended, and that a law adopted by a parliamentary majority vote is less likely to be amended than others. However, there is no relationship between legislative stability and the ideological philosophy embraced by the government, nor the consensual nature by which the law was approved, nor even the fact that the draft law was originally submitted by members of parliament or by the executive authority.