可能的前提条件(Vorbehalt Des Möglichen)是否限制了司法干预社会公共政策

R. Perlingeiro
{"title":"可能的前提条件(Vorbehalt Des Möglichen)是否限制了司法干预社会公共政策","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":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"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\":null,\"pages\":null},\"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}","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

摘要

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。
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
Does the Precondition of the Possible (Vorbehalt Des Möglichen) Limit Judicial Intervention in Social Public Policies
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.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊最新文献
¿Impunidad sistémica o Delito Simbólico? La investigación fiscal y punición del delito de aborto en Arequipa, Perú (2008-2020) Collusion or collision? The war on drugs in the Philippines Paz sin garantías: el asesinato de líderes de restitución y sustitución de cultivos de uso ilícito en Colombia Baseball arbitration desde una perspectiva contractual Ciudadanos organizados y derecho a la salud. Significados en la Venezuela del siglo XXI
×
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