資源描述:
《論憲法司法化》由會員上傳分享,免費在線閱讀,更多相關內容在行業(yè)資料-天天文庫。
1、論憲法司法化[論文摘要:]2001年,最高人民法院就齊玉苓以受教育權被侵害為由而起訴所作出司法解釋引發(fā)憲法司法化問題的討論還沒完全結束,2003年5月,湖北青年孫志剛在廣州被故意傷害致死一案再次引發(fā)違憲審查爭議。憲法司法化起源于美國,現(xiàn)在已成為世界各國的普遍做法。憲法司法化的產生并非偶然,它有著重要的現(xiàn)實意義,尤其對于正處于建設社會主義法治國家的我國來說。長期以來,在我國形成了憲法不能作為直接裁判依據的慣例,使憲法神秘化、更閑置化,憲法的頻繁變更削弱了憲法的穩(wěn)定性和權威性。在公民因尋求最后一道憲法權利救濟屏障而不斷以憲法權利受
2、侵犯為由向法院起訴的同時,在世界各國是憲法司法化的普遍潮流影響下,在中國法治環(huán)境呈良性向前發(fā)展的情況下,我們不得不尋求新的措施去救濟公民本應享有的憲法權利。如何解決這些問題是我國實現(xiàn)真正的社會主義憲政,應對本國乃至世界法治環(huán)境的挑戰(zhàn),正是我國憲法司法化所面臨的嚴峻挑戰(zhàn)。關鍵詞:憲法司法化權利違憲審查憲政Paperabstract:In2001,theSupremePeople'sCourttakereceiveseducational-rightonQiYuLingtoviolateasbybutsuesmakesthejud
3、icialinterpretationinitiationconstitutionThelawjudicaturequestiondiscussiondoesnothaveendedcompletely,inMay,2003,HubeiyouthSunZhigangisinjuredintentionallyinGuangzhoulethallyAdocumentinitiatestheviolationoftheconstitutionexaminationdisputeoncemore.Theconstitutionjud
4、icatureorigininUS,hasnowbecomethevariouscountriestheuniversalprocedure.Theconstitutionjudicatureproductionaccidentally,ithasbynomeanstheimportantpracticalsignificance,regardingisbeingintheconstructionsocialismgovernmentbylawespeciallyNationalourcountrysaid.Sincelong
5、ago,formedtheconstitutioninourcountrynottobeabletotakethedirectrefereebasistheconvention,causedtheconstitutionmystery,toleaveunused,theconstitutionfrequentchangeweakenedtheconstitutionstabilityandtheauthority.Becauseofseekslasttheconstitutionrightreliefbarrierwhilet
6、hecitizenbuttoencroachunceasinglytaketheconstitutionrightasbytocourtprosecution,inthevariouscountriesisundertheconstitutionjudicatureuniversaltidalcurrentinfluence,assumesthebenignityintheChinesegovernmentbylawenvironmentinthesituationwhichmovesforward,wecannotbutse
7、ekthenewmeasuretoproviderelieftheconstitutionrightwhichthecitizenoriginallyshouldenjoy.Howsolvestheseproblemsisourcountryrealizesthetruesocialismconstitutionalgovernment,shouldtoourcountryandeventheworldgovernmentbylawenvironmentchallenge,bepreciselythesternchalleng
8、ewhichourcountryconstitutionjudicaturefaces.Keyword:Constitution,judicature,right,violationoftheconstitutionexamination,constitutionalgove