司法审查正当性论争之辨析

发布时间：2018-03-24 14:18

本文选题：司法审查　切入点：政治正当性　出处：《法律科学(西北政法大学学报)》2012年06期

【摘要】：司法审查的正当性论争所造成的司法审查正当性困窘,堪称司法审查乃"知难行易"。辩解和诘难司法审查的两种立场,无不从民主、分权、人权与司法审查之关联以证立或驳斥司法审查,其中又内在地勾连着宪法的性质、立法与司法的关系、宪法解释的方法。此种理论上的分异乃至对立,端在于司法审查的正当性问题已非一般意义的司法的正当性问题,而是因司法审查内含修宪,遂转成为政治正当性问题。民主、分权、人权正是关联着司法审查权的依据、方式和目标三个方面,从而成为证立或驳斥司法审查所必然涉及者。而对民主、分权、人权的理解和判定,又往往人言人殊,由此造成理论上的各执一词、分庭抗礼。然而,在证立与驳斥司法审查之间,逻辑上的要求是不对等的。此所以司法审查在理论上困难重重,在实践上却大行其道。此亦所谓"知行分离"。
[Abstract]:Due to the controversy over the legitimacy of judicial review, it can be called as "difficult to do". The two positions of justification and cross-examination of judicial review are all from democracy and separation of powers. The connection between human rights and judicial review is based on evidence or refutation of judicial review, in which the nature of the constitution, the relationship between the legislation and the judiciary, the method of interpretation of the constitution, the differences and even the opposites in theory, are intrinsically linked. The problem lies in the legitimacy of judicial review, which is not the legitimacy of judicial review in general sense, but the political legitimacy problem because judicial review contains constitutional amendments. Democracy, separation of powers and human rights are the basis of the right to judicial review. The three aspects of the mode and the objective, thus becoming necessary to justify or refute judicial review... and the understanding and determination of democracy, separation of powers, human rights, and often the difference between people, resulting in theoretical dogma and antagonism... However, the understanding and determination of democracy, separation of powers, human rights, etc. The logical requirement is not equal between the evidence and the refutation of judicial review, so judicial review is difficult in theory, but it is popular in practice. This is also called "separation of knowledge and action".
【作者单位】：厦门大学法学院;
【分类号】：D90

【参考文献】