首页> 外文期刊>International journal of constitutional law >Do constitutional entrenchment clauses matter? Constitutional review of constitutional amendments in Europe
【24h】

Do constitutional entrenchment clauses matter? Constitutional review of constitutional amendments in Europe

机译:宪法侵权条款是否重要?欧洲宪法修正案的宪法审查

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Do constitutional entrenchment clauses matter? And if yes, how? This article examines these questions by analyzing a comprehensive collection of 154 decisions issued by European constitutional and supreme courts from 1945 up to 2016, on the constitutionality of constitutional amendments. The article shows that entrenchment clauses do matter: in the vast majority of decisions studied, the claimants and/or the courts referred to a constitutional entrenchment clause. About one-fourth of these cases resulted in the invalidation of a constitutional amendment, most of which were based on an "eternity clause," that is, the most extreme type of entrenchment clauses. However, the article also demonstrates that most of these invalidations can be assessed as instances of democracy-adverse judicial activism. The article concludes, therefore, that entrenchment clauses cannot be considered an unambiguous instrument for the protection of democratic constitutionalism.
机译:宪法侵权条款是否重要?如果是,怎么样?本文通过分析1945年欧洲宪法和最高法庭达到2016年达到2016年的核心修正案的合宪性,通过分析欧洲宪法和最高法庭颁发的全面收集154项决定的全面收集。文章显示,壕沟条款确实如:在绝大多数决定中,索赔人和/或法院提到了宪法侵权条款。关于这些案件的四分之一导致宪法修正案的无效,其中大部分是基于“永恒条款”,即最极端的壕沟条款类型。但是,本文还表明,大多数无效可以被评估为民主 - 不利司法活动的情况。因此,该文章因此,侵权条款不能被视为保护民主宪政的明确案例。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号