三权分立和宪法法院高于议会和行政机关的制度至上

IF 0.3 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW South African Journal on Human Rights Pub Date : 2020-10-01 DOI:10.1080/02587203.2021.1925954
Felix Dube
{"title":"三权分立和宪法法院高于议会和行政机关的制度至上","authors":"Felix Dube","doi":"10.1080/02587203.2021.1925954","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract South African judges often caution against judicial encroachment into what they perceive as the exclusive domains of the legislature and the executive. Their caveats stem from the doctrine of separation of powers, which classically divides state authority between the three branches of government. However, the classification of the courts, particularly the Constitutional Court, as a branch of the government potentially misconstrues the division of state authority in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The powers and authority of the Constitutional Court place it at the apex of the legal and political order such that from a conceptual and practical view, the Court is constitutionally superior to Parliament and the executive. As such, a traditional understanding of the doctrine of separation of powers does not properly reflect the South African constitutional arrangement. This contribution re-evaluates the relevance and application of the doctrine of separation of powers in contemporary jurisprudence. It recognises the superiority of the Constitutional Court over Parliament and the executive and shows that the time has come to consider the institutional supremacy of the Constitutional Court as a possible doctrine of constitutional law in South Africa.","PeriodicalId":44989,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal on Human Rights","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2021.1925954","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Separation of powers and the institutional supremacy of the Constitutional Court over Parliament and the executive\",\"authors\":\"Felix Dube\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02587203.2021.1925954\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract South African judges often caution against judicial encroachment into what they perceive as the exclusive domains of the legislature and the executive. Their caveats stem from the doctrine of separation of powers, which classically divides state authority between the three branches of government. However, the classification of the courts, particularly the Constitutional Court, as a branch of the government potentially misconstrues the division of state authority in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The powers and authority of the Constitutional Court place it at the apex of the legal and political order such that from a conceptual and practical view, the Court is constitutionally superior to Parliament and the executive. As such, a traditional understanding of the doctrine of separation of powers does not properly reflect the South African constitutional arrangement. This contribution re-evaluates the relevance and application of the doctrine of separation of powers in contemporary jurisprudence. It recognises the superiority of the Constitutional Court over Parliament and the executive and shows that the time has come to consider the institutional supremacy of the Constitutional Court as a possible doctrine of constitutional law in South Africa.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44989,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal on Human Rights\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/02587203.2021.1925954\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal on Human Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2021.1925954\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal on Human Rights","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2021.1925954","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要南非法官经常警告不要让司法侵犯他们所认为的立法机构和行政部门的专属领域。他们的警告源于分权理论,该理论将国家权力典型地划分为政府的三个部门。然而,将法院,特别是宪法法院归类为政府部门,可能会误解1996年《南非共和国宪法》中对国家权力的划分。宪法法院的权力和权威使其处于法律和政治秩序的顶端,因此从概念和实践角度来看,宪法法院在宪法上优于议会和行政部门。因此,对三权分立学说的传统理解并不能恰当地反映南非的宪法安排。这一贡献重新评估了三权分立学说在当代法学中的相关性和应用。它承认宪法法院优于议会和行政部门,并表明现在是时候将宪法法院的制度至高无上视为南非可能的宪法学说了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Separation of powers and the institutional supremacy of the Constitutional Court over Parliament and the executive
Abstract South African judges often caution against judicial encroachment into what they perceive as the exclusive domains of the legislature and the executive. Their caveats stem from the doctrine of separation of powers, which classically divides state authority between the three branches of government. However, the classification of the courts, particularly the Constitutional Court, as a branch of the government potentially misconstrues the division of state authority in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The powers and authority of the Constitutional Court place it at the apex of the legal and political order such that from a conceptual and practical view, the Court is constitutionally superior to Parliament and the executive. As such, a traditional understanding of the doctrine of separation of powers does not properly reflect the South African constitutional arrangement. This contribution re-evaluates the relevance and application of the doctrine of separation of powers in contemporary jurisprudence. It recognises the superiority of the Constitutional Court over Parliament and the executive and shows that the time has come to consider the institutional supremacy of the Constitutional Court as a possible doctrine of constitutional law in South Africa.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
77.80%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Consulting citizens: Addressing the deficits in participatory democracy Ubuntu, human rights and sustainable development: Lessons from the African Arbitration Academy’s Model Bilateral Investment Treaty Should employees be entitled to legal representation during disciplinary hearings in South Africa? Research handbook on economic, social and cultural rights Augmentative and alternative communication in the South African justice system: Potential and pitfalls
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1