本文選題：司法審查 + 解釋主義　； 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2009年碩士論文

【摘要】： 司法審查是指是指司法機(jī)關(guān)通過(guò)對(duì)立法機(jī)關(guān)和行政機(jī)關(guān)制定的法律、法規(guī)及其他行使國(guó)家權(quán)力的活動(dòng)進(jìn)行審查,宣告違反憲法的法律、法規(guī)無(wú)效及對(duì)其他違法活動(dòng)通過(guò)司法裁定予以糾正,從而切實(shí)維護(hù)憲法的實(shí)施,保護(hù)公民和法人的合法權(quán)益。美國(guó)是世界上最早出現(xiàn)司法審查案例并形成相關(guān)制度的國(guó)家,美國(guó)憲法學(xué)者伊利教授在透徹研究了當(dāng)前主流的兩種司法審查理論,解釋主義和非解釋主義的優(yōu)劣之后,發(fā)現(xiàn)目前主流司法審查理論和民主政治理論的不兼容問(wèn)題,民主選舉產(chǎn)生的立法機(jī)關(guān)制定的法律,可以被非民選的法院宣告違憲無(wú)效,而美國(guó)憲法亦未明文規(guī)定法院有權(quán)對(duì)立法和行政機(jī)關(guān)進(jìn)行審查。而解釋主義和非解釋主義都不能完美的解決這個(gè)司法審查理論和民主政治理論的矛盾問(wèn)題。伊利教授提出自己的觀(guān)點(diǎn),即疏通政治變革的渠道,和保障少數(shù)群體的代表權(quán)。以此來(lái)完善司法審查理論。本文對(duì)伊利教授的基本觀(guān)點(diǎn)進(jìn)行介紹,根據(jù)主流的違憲審查理論,結(jié)合我國(guó)的憲法訴訟理論,立法和司法實(shí)踐,提出一些自己的理解。 全文共分為四個(gè)部分。第一部分是對(duì)在目前司法審查理論領(lǐng)域處于主流地位的解釋主義進(jìn)行分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)其吸引力和合理性,但也要看到其受到憲法條款的約束而帶來(lái)的缺陷。第二部分是對(duì)針對(duì)解釋主義的缺陷,探尋非解釋主義的價(jià)值,如自然法,中立原則,理性等等。并推斷出,非解釋主義依然無(wú)法解決司法審查與民主的不兼容闖題。第三部分通過(guò)從代議制政府和美國(guó)憲法的本質(zhì)兩方面進(jìn)行分析,得出司法審查從根本上就是對(duì)民主的一種不信任,并論證了法院作為審判者的合理地位。第四部分,伊利教授對(duì)司法審查理論的兩個(gè)建設(shè)性的建議,即疏通政治變革的渠道,和保障少數(shù)群體的立法權(quán)等權(quán)益,建立透明的立法程序。在肯定這兩個(gè)建議的基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合各國(guó)憲法訴訟理論和實(shí)踐,提出自己一些理解和建議。
[Abstract]:Judicial review refers to laws that the judiciary declares to be unconstitutional by reviewing laws, regulations and other activities made by the legislature and the executive organs in the exercise of state power, The law is invalid and other illegal activities are corrected by judicial ruling, so as to safeguard the implementation of the Constitution and protect the legitimate rights and interests of citizens and legal persons. The United States is the first country in the world to have cases of judicial review and form relevant systems. Professor Ely, a constitutional scholar of the United States, has thoroughly studied the advantages and disadvantages of the two main theories of judicial review, interpretionism and non-hermeneuticism. Finding that the current mainstream judicial review theory and democratic political theory are incompatible, that laws formulated by democratically elected legislatures can be declared unconstitutional by unelected courts. Nor does the Constitution expressly provide for the courts to review legislative and executive bodies. Neither interpretivism nor non-hermeneutics can solve the contradiction between judicial review theory and democratic politics theory. Professor Ely puts forward his own point of view, that is, to liberalize the channels of political change and guarantee minority representation. In order to perfect the theory of judicial review. This paper introduces Professor Yili's basic viewpoints, and puts forward some understandings according to the mainstream theory of unconstitutional review, combined with the constitutional litigation theory, legislation and judicial practice in our country. The full text is divided into four parts. The first part is an analysis of interpretivism which is in the mainstream position in the field of judicial review theory at present, and finds its attraction and rationality, but it should also see the defects brought about by the restriction of the constitution clause. The second part explores the value of non-hermeneutics, such as natural law, neutral principle, rationality and so on. And infer that non-hermeneutics still cannot solve the incompatibility between judicial review and democracy. The third part analyzes the essence of representative government and American constitution, and concludes that judicial review is a kind of distrust of democracy, and demonstrates the reasonable position of the court as a judge. In the fourth part, Professor Yili's two constructive suggestions to the theory of judicial review, namely, to dredge the channels of political change and to protect the legislative power of minority groups, and to establish a transparent legislative procedure. On the basis of affirming these two suggestions, combined with the theory and practice of constitutional litigation in various countries, this paper puts forward some understandings and suggestions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D971.2;DD911

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 韓鐵;;新政以來(lái)美國(guó)行政法的發(fā)展與司法審查的新領(lǐng)域[J];史學(xué)月刊;2008年06期

2 胡曉玲;;司法審查與民主關(guān)系的存在視角解讀[J];西安石油大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年03期

，

本文編號(hào)：1961116