期刊文献+

我国合宪性审查的宪法属性 被引量:8

On the Constitutional Nature of Constitutional Review in China
下载PDF
导出
摘要 权力机关宪法监督模式决定了我国合宪性审查的性质是政治审查,其所审查的是政治问题,而非法律问题。法律问题既不同于政治问题,也不同于事实问题。构成法律问题的标准是案件和争议,其理论基础是权力分工,须符合诉讼资格、成熟性和争议性,且须通过法律适用在事实与规范之间往返流连进行涵摄,裁决是否予以保护。我国合宪性审查之所以不是法律问题,在于审查的理论基础、规范依据、审查主体、审查目的、审查对象、审查程序、审查标准、审查效力不同于法院中心的司法审查。我国的合宪性审查是立法机关在宪法权限范围内通过运行立法权力实施宪法、维护宪法权威、确保法治统一的过程,以此体现人民主权原则。 The mode of constitutional supervision of power organs determines that the nature of constitutional review in China is political review,which examines political issues rather than legal issues.Legal issues are different from political issues as well as factual issues.The standard of legal issues is cases and controversy.Its theoretical basis is the division of power,which must meet the standing,ripeness and mootness.It must be covered by the application of law between facts and norms back and forth,to rule whether it is to be protected.The reason why constitutional review in China is not a legal issue lies in that the theoretical basis,normative basis,review subject,review purpose,review object,review procedure,review standard and review effect of the review are different from the judicial review of the court center.The constitutional review in China is a process in which the legislature implements the constitution,maintains the authority of the Constitution and ensures the unity of the rule of law through the operation of legislative power within the scope of constitutional authority,so as to reflect the principle of people’s sovereignty.
作者 郑贤君 Zheng Xianjun
出处 《财经法学》 2020年第5期88-101,共14页 Law and Economy
基金 国家社会科学基金重点项目“合宪性审查标准的中国化与体系化”(19AFX005)的阶段性成果。
关键词 民主集中制 监督宪法实施 立法机关 规范性文件 democratic centralism supervision of the constitutional enforcement legislature normative documents
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献41

  • 1张翔.基本权利的双重性质[J].法学研究,2005,27(3):21-36. 被引量:410
  • 2韩大元.试论宪法解释的效力[J].山东社会科学,2005(6):5-10. 被引量:20
  • 3Louis Favoreu et Loic Philip, Its Grandes Decisions du Conseil Constitutional, Paris: Dalloz, 2007, p177.
  • 4Michel Debre, Speech before the General Assembly of the Conseil dF.tat, August 27, 1958, reprinted in III Documents pour servir a l' Histoire de IElaboration de la Constitution du 4 octobre 1958, Paris : 1991, p260.
  • 5Decision 71 -44DC du 17 Juillet 1971 du Conseil Constitutionnel.
  • 6Dominique Rousseau, Droit du contentieux constitutionnel, Paris: Montchrestien, 2006. p67.
  • 7Haimbaugh, Was It France's Marbury v. Madison?, 35 OHIO ST. L.J. 926 (1974).
  • 8Cf. Louis Favoreu, Patrick Gala, Richard Ghevontian, Anna- belle Pena- Soler, Otto Pfersmann, Joseph Pini, Andre Roux, Guy Scoffoni et Jerome Tremeau, Droit des libertes fondamentales, Paris: DaUoz, 2007. p85.
  • 9CF Didier Maus, Nouveaux regards sur le controle de constitutionalite par voie d' exception, in Melanges en l' Honeur de Michel Troper, Veronique Champeil -Desplats et al. eds, 2007. p665, 668.
  • 10Gerome Courtois, Le Parlement a qui perd gagne, in Le Monde, 21 Mai 2008.

共引文献40

二级引证文献31

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部