俄罗斯宪法法院法学中的比例原则

IF 0.5 4区 社会学 Q3 LAW Review of Central and East European Law Pub Date : 2021-05-27 DOI:10.1163/15730352-BJA10049
A. Troitskaya
{"title":"俄罗斯宪法法院法学中的比例原则","authors":"A. Troitskaya","doi":"10.1163/15730352-BJA10049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThis paper addresses the boundaries on restrictions of human rights imposed by the proportionality principle, examines the elements of the structure of this principle, and attempts to present the meaning of its elements consistently in terms of the potential for the protection of fundamental rights that are subject to restrictions. The main criticisms of some proportionality tests are considered, as well as ways to minimize the risks associated with the use of proportionality. These theoretical considerations are placed in the context of the jurisprudence of the Russian Constitutional Court, to demonstrate that the Court, instead of consistently applying proportionality tests, often draws generalized conclusions regarding the proportionality (or disproportionality) of restrictions and therefore tends to heighten some of the risks of applying the principle. One can observe some positive changes in the application of the principle, and in further requests for this. Conclusions are formulated concerning the improvement of the Court’s activities in terms of a more consistent and structured implementation of the principle of proportionality.","PeriodicalId":42845,"journal":{"name":"Review of Central and East European Law","volume":"93 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Proportionality Principle in the Jurisprudence of the Russian Constitutional Court\",\"authors\":\"A. Troitskaya\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15730352-BJA10049\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThis paper addresses the boundaries on restrictions of human rights imposed by the proportionality principle, examines the elements of the structure of this principle, and attempts to present the meaning of its elements consistently in terms of the potential for the protection of fundamental rights that are subject to restrictions. The main criticisms of some proportionality tests are considered, as well as ways to minimize the risks associated with the use of proportionality. These theoretical considerations are placed in the context of the jurisprudence of the Russian Constitutional Court, to demonstrate that the Court, instead of consistently applying proportionality tests, often draws generalized conclusions regarding the proportionality (or disproportionality) of restrictions and therefore tends to heighten some of the risks of applying the principle. One can observe some positive changes in the application of the principle, and in further requests for this. Conclusions are formulated concerning the improvement of the Court’s activities in terms of a more consistent and structured implementation of the principle of proportionality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42845,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Central and East European Law\",\"volume\":\"93 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Central and East European Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10049\",\"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":"Review of Central and East European Law","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730352-BJA10049","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: 0

摘要

本文讨论了比例原则对人权限制的界限,审查了这一原则结构的要素,并试图从保护受限制的基本权利的潜力方面一致地提出其要素的含义。审议了对某些相称性检验的主要批评,以及尽量减少与使用相称性有关的风险的方法。这些理论上的考虑是在俄罗斯宪法法院的判例背景下进行的,以证明法院不是一贯地适用相称性检验标准,而是经常就限制的相称性(或不相称性)得出笼统的结论,因此往往会增加适用这一原则的一些风险。人们可以观察到在适用这一原则方面以及在进一步提出这一要求方面的一些积极变化。在更一致和有组织地执行相称原则方面,已拟订了关于改进法院活动的结论。
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
The Proportionality Principle in the Jurisprudence of the Russian Constitutional Court
This paper addresses the boundaries on restrictions of human rights imposed by the proportionality principle, examines the elements of the structure of this principle, and attempts to present the meaning of its elements consistently in terms of the potential for the protection of fundamental rights that are subject to restrictions. The main criticisms of some proportionality tests are considered, as well as ways to minimize the risks associated with the use of proportionality. These theoretical considerations are placed in the context of the jurisprudence of the Russian Constitutional Court, to demonstrate that the Court, instead of consistently applying proportionality tests, often draws generalized conclusions regarding the proportionality (or disproportionality) of restrictions and therefore tends to heighten some of the risks of applying the principle. One can observe some positive changes in the application of the principle, and in further requests for this. Conclusions are formulated concerning the improvement of the Court’s activities in terms of a more consistent and structured implementation of the principle of proportionality.
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
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Review of Central and East European Law critically examines issues of legal doctrine and practice in the CIS and CEE regions. An important aspect of this is, for example, the harmonization of legal principles and rules; another facet is the legal impact of the intertwining of domestic economies, on the one hand, with regional economies and the processes of international trade and investment on the other. The Review offers a forum for discussion of topical questions of public and private law. The Review encourages comparative research; it is hoped that, in this way, additional insights in legal developments can be communicated to those interested in questions, not only of law, but also of politics, economics, and of society of the CIS and CEE countries.
期刊最新文献
Is Transparency Enough? Informal Governance Networks and the Selection Process of a Georgian Judge to the European Court of Human Rights Validity of Jurisdiction Clauses in Standard Terms and Conditions of International Commercial Contracts under Turkish Law Multiplication of Extraordinary Appeal Measures in Polish Criminal Proceedings: A Guarantee of Justice or Erosion of the Principle of Legal Certainty? Balancing Initial Copyright Ownership in Czech and Slovak Private International Law Accented Universality: Exploring Accountability as a Non-Translatable Concept in Central Asia
×
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