{"title":"Does the Precondition of the Possible (Vorbehalt Des Möglichen) Limit Judicial Intervention in Social Public Policies","authors":"R. Perlingeiro","doi":"10.12804/esj16.02.2014.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In light of the shortage of funding to support positive rights to social welfare, the text analyses the main precedents of the Federal Constitutional Court concerning the proviso of the possible (Vorbehalt des Moglichen), and concludes that is not applicable to the existential minimum (Existenzminimum) and that, in terms of the enforceability (potential for judicial review) of any other positive rights to social welfare guaranteed by law, the margin of discretion granted to law-makers in budgetary policymaking should be reduced to zero. In addition, the text demonstrates that the proviso of the possible, contrary to what might be imagined, has nothing to do with social public policies which, in the context of fundamental procedural rights, are justified only as a means of realisation of the social benefits that may be claimed.","PeriodicalId":40249,"journal":{"name":"Revista Estudios Socio-Juridicos","volume":"16 1","pages":"181-212"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Estudios Socio-Juridicos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12804/esj16.02.2014.06","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
In light of the shortage of funding to support positive rights to social welfare, the text analyses the main precedents of the Federal Constitutional Court concerning the proviso of the possible (Vorbehalt des Moglichen), and concludes that is not applicable to the existential minimum (Existenzminimum) and that, in terms of the enforceability (potential for judicial review) of any other positive rights to social welfare guaranteed by law, the margin of discretion granted to law-makers in budgetary policymaking should be reduced to zero. In addition, the text demonstrates that the proviso of the possible, contrary to what might be imagined, has nothing to do with social public policies which, in the context of fundamental procedural rights, are justified only as a means of realisation of the social benefits that may be claimed.
西班牙语版de estest articulo esta disposable en: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2441746.La意大利语版de questo documentation to the disposable en: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2480740.A葡萄牙语版de destente esta disponivel em:http://ssrn.com/abstract=2343965.In鉴于支持积极的社会福利权利的资金短缺,本文分析了联邦宪法法院关于可能的但书(Vorbehalt des Moglichen)的主要先例,并得出结论,该但书不适用于存在的最低限度(Existenzminimum),并且就法律保障的任何其他积极的社会福利权利的可执行性(司法审查的可能性)而言,在预算政策制定中给予立法者的自由裁量权应该减少到零。此外,案文表明,与人们的想象相反,可能性的但书与社会公共政策毫无关系,在基本程序权利的范围内,这些政策只有作为实现可能要求的社会利益的手段才有理由。