| 敖海静.评中国台湾地区“司法院大法官审理案件法修正草案”[J].,2018,(3):92-99 |
| 评中国台湾地区“司法院大法官审理案件法修正草案” |
| Comment on Draft of Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act in Taiwan |
| 投稿时间：2018-01-08 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 中国台湾地区 “大法官审理案件法修正草案” “司法院” “违宪审查制度” |
| English Keywords:draft of constitutional interpretation procedure act Judicial Yuan constitutional review system |
| Fund Project: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 832 |
| 全文下载次数: 556 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 我国台湾地区自20世纪90年代开始推进所谓以“违宪审查制度”改革为重点的“宪政改革”,至2001年“大法官”作成“释字第530号解释”方才将“最高审判机关”确定为“司法院”的改革目标。2013年,“司法院”提出“大法官审理案件法修正草案”,拟从“大法官”组织的“法庭化“,便捷“人民声请释宪”等方面改革“违宪审查制度”,试图通过落实1999年“司法改革会议”结论和“释字第530号解释”的意旨,强化“违宪审查制度”的司法审判性质和个案救济功能。但“宪法法庭”仍然无法对个案中人民权利进行积极、直接的救济,是为该草案最大遗憾。长远来看,回复至“司法院为最高审判机关之制宪本旨”是未来我国台湾地区“违宪审查制度”改革的核心。 |
| English Summary: |
| Since the early 90s of last century,Taiwan began to promote the reform of constitutional review. Following interpretation No. 530 in 2001,the highest judicial organ was identified as the objective of the reform of the Judicial Yuan. In 2013,Judicial Yuan introduced Draft of Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act to Legislative Yuan and planed to make the organization of Grand Justice like a court and reform the constitutional interpretation system in handing the cases filed by people. Through implementing the spirits of judicial reform conference in 1999 and interpretation No. 530 in 2001,Judicial Yuan attempted at strengthening the judicial nature of constitutional review system and its human rights relief function in single case. But the constitutional court still cannot relief the rights of people in single case with actively direct method. This is the biggest flaw of Draft of Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act. In the long run,taking the original intent which means that Judicial Yuan is the highest judicial organ seriously is the core of the reform of the constitutional review system in Taiwan. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
| 关闭 |
|
|
|