本文選題：合憲性審查 + 立法事實　； 參考：《法學(xué)家》2016年06期

【摘要】：作為代議機關(guān)的人民代表大會及其常委會制定的法律及地方性法規(guī)雖然有民意的支撐,但此類立法的合憲性取決于其是否有相關(guān)的社會經(jīng)濟方面的事實基礎(chǔ)。因而,對立法事實加以認(rèn)定,便成為了針對立法實施合憲性審查的重要環(huán)節(jié)。立法事實包括與立法目的有關(guān)的事實、與立法的手段和目的之關(guān)聯(lián)性相關(guān)的事實,以及作為法益衡量之前提的事實。在由司法機關(guān)針對立法的合憲性實施審查的國家,法院在認(rèn)定立法事實時通常采取自制的立場。我國雖未采取由法院實施合憲性審查的體制,但考慮到審查的程序、立法機關(guān)予以回應(yīng)的時限,以及審查的目的,作為審查主體的人民代表大會及其常委會亦應(yīng)在認(rèn)定立法事實方面保持一定程度的自制。針對立法實施合憲性審查時的自制技術(shù)包括將審查基準(zhǔn)與不確定性原則相結(jié)合,以及程序性審查優(yōu)先。
[Abstract]:Although the laws and regulations enacted by the people's Congress and its standing committee as representative organs are supported by public opinion, the constitutionality of such legislation depends on whether it has the relevant social and economic factual basis. Therefore, to confirm the legislative facts has become an important link in the constitutionality review of the implementation of legislation. The legislative facts include the facts related to the legislative purpose, the relevance of the legislative means and the ends, and the facts as the premise of the measurement of legal interest. In countries where the judiciary reviews the constitutionality of legislation, courts usually take a self-control position in determining legislative facts. Although our country does not adopt a system of constitutional review by the courts, it takes into account the procedure of the review, the time frame within which the legislature responds, and the purpose of the review. The people's Congress and its standing committee, as the subject of review, should also maintain a certain degree of self-control in the determination of legislative facts. Self-made techniques for implementing constitutionality review in legislation include combining the review benchmark with the principle of uncertainty, and giving priority to procedural review.
【作者單位】： 廈門大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【基金】：2015年度福建省社科規(guī)劃項目青年項目“《立法法》修改后福建省較大的市地方性法規(guī)合法性審查標(biāo)準(zhǔn)研究”(FJ2015C034)的階段性成果
【分類號】：D921

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 凌維慈;;憲法訴訟中的立法事實審查——以美國法為例[J];浙江社會科學(xué);2006年06期

，

本文編號：1819928