罗马尼亚的全民公决。吃毒树上的苹果?个人和目的论解释

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Journal of Legal Studies Pub Date : 2019-12-01 DOI:10.2478/jles-2019-0007
R. Roghină
{"title":"罗马尼亚的全民公决。吃毒树上的苹果?个人和目的论解释","authors":"R. Roghină","doi":"10.2478/jles-2019-0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Through this article, we propose an (original) analytical approach on the consultative referendum of May 2019 and a wider critical landscape regarding the consultative referendum institution by enforcing a teleological interpretation. In this sense, we propose three sections. We will start with a short overview on the use of the consultative referendum in the recent years of Romanian democracy. In the second section we will focus on the consultative referendum from 26 May, 2019. In the third section we will ask the Founding Fathers of the Constitution for an “opinion” regarding the possibilities and impossibilities of the consultative referendum.","PeriodicalId":47756,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Studies","volume":"44 1","pages":"23 - 43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Romanian Prezidentialized Consultative Referendum. Eating Apples from a Poisonous Tree? Personal and Teleological Interpretations\",\"authors\":\"R. Roghină\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/jles-2019-0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Through this article, we propose an (original) analytical approach on the consultative referendum of May 2019 and a wider critical landscape regarding the consultative referendum institution by enforcing a teleological interpretation. In this sense, we propose three sections. We will start with a short overview on the use of the consultative referendum in the recent years of Romanian democracy. In the second section we will focus on the consultative referendum from 26 May, 2019. In the third section we will ask the Founding Fathers of the Constitution for an “opinion” regarding the possibilities and impossibilities of the consultative referendum.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47756,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"23 - 43\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/jles-2019-0007\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jles-2019-0007","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通过本文,我们提出了一种(原创的)分析方法,通过强制目的论解释来分析2019年5月的协商公投,并对协商公投制度进行了更广泛的批评。在这个意义上,我们提出了三个部分。我们首先将简要概述近年来在罗马尼亚民主中使用协商性公民投票的情况。在第二部分,我们将重点关注2019年5月26日的协商性公投。在第三节中,我们将要求宪法的开国元勋就协商性公民投票的可能性和不可能性发表“意见”。
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 Romanian Prezidentialized Consultative Referendum. Eating Apples from a Poisonous Tree? Personal and Teleological Interpretations
Abstract Through this article, we propose an (original) analytical approach on the consultative referendum of May 2019 and a wider critical landscape regarding the consultative referendum institution by enforcing a teleological interpretation. In this sense, we propose three sections. We will start with a short overview on the use of the consultative referendum in the recent years of Romanian democracy. In the second section we will focus on the consultative referendum from 26 May, 2019. In the third section we will ask the Founding Fathers of the Constitution for an “opinion” regarding the possibilities and impossibilities of the consultative referendum.
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
1.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Legal Studies is a journal of interdisciplinary academic research into law and legal institutions. It emphasizes social science approaches, especially those of economics, political science, and psychology, but it also publishes the work of historians, philosophers, and others who are interested in legal theory. The JLS was founded in 1972.
期刊最新文献
Forensic Science Integration in Legal Education: A Paradigm Shift for Strengthening Legal Expertise in Pakistan QUO Quadis Romanian Education? Brief Introspection Tax Evasion Between Tax Optimization at the Border of Legality, Tax Burden and Voluntary Compliance Genesis of Legal Regulation of Pre-Trial Detention in Sweden and Ukraine: Comparative Analysis Oligarchic Politics in the Context of a Democratic Rule of Law in Relation to the Principle of Expediency
×
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