弱司法审查体制必要性之证成

The Necessity of Weak-form Judicial Review System

作为一种新型权利保障模式,英联邦国家建立的弱司法审查体制引起了比较宪法学界的广泛关注,该体制的必要性成为一项核心议题,主要内容是如何理解新模式下法院与议会的关系。对话理论问世以后,迅速成为回答该问题的统治性范式。它涵盖了法院和议会互动的各个环节,对司法实践产生了深刻影响。在后续发展中,原本重在描述弱司法审查体制的对话理论逐渐出现了规范性转向,开始针对议会和法院如何行使权力提出指导意见。但是,对话理论没有充分论证弱司法审查体制的独特性,也没有阐释该体制的价值内涵,其规范性转向因而遭到批判,需要予以补充和完善。经过重构的对话理论包括三个层次,分别论证弱司法审查体制何以可能、为何可欲以及如何可行,从而兼具解释性与建构性。尽管如此,新的对话理论仍有发展空间,需要在与实践的互动中进行调整和更新。

The weak-form judicial review in Commonwealth countries,as a new type of rights protection system,has attracted much attention from scholars and the necessity of this new model,with the relationship between the court and the parliament as its main content,has become a key question in the field of comparative constitutional law.Since its emergence,the dialogue theory has rapidly become a dominate paradigm for answering this question.This new theory covers all links of the interaction between the court and the parliament and has a profound influence on judicial practice.During the follow-up development,the nature of the dialogue theory has gradually changed from a descriptive one to a normative one,which means it began to guide judges and legislators on how to exercise their power.However,the dialogue theory fails to fully demonstrate the peculiarity and values of weak-form judicial review.As a result,its normative transformation has been criticized and some supplements and improvement are needed.After reconstruction,the new dialogue theory is both interpretive and constructive and it has three levels,which demonstrate why weak-form judicial review is possible,why it is valuable and how it should operate.In spite of this,the new dialogue theory is not perfect and still needs to be adjusted and updated in the process of interaction with the practice.