Judicial Review and Parliamentary Debate: Enriching the Doctrine of Due Deference
Judicial Review and Parliamentary Debate: Enriching the Doctrine of Due Deference
复制标题
司法审查和议会辩论：丰富应有尊重的原则
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2013
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Natasha Simonsen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
L. Lazarus;Natasha Simonsen
欧洲人权法院最近的案例在决定是否对成员国的决定适用裁量权时更加强调立法辩论的质量。本文探讨了法院一般如何评估有关权利的立法辩论的质量，并提出了一套评估此类辩论的标准。在突破正统宪法界限的同时，本文展望了民主对话的框架，在该框架中，法院、议会和其他宪法机构共享主权。在这种情况下，它认为法院应该推迟议会审议摆在他们面前的权利问题的过程中满足某些标准的情况。
Recent cases in the European Court of Human Rights have placed greater emphasis on the quality of legislative debate when determining whether to apply the margin of appreciation to the decisions of member States. This paper explores how courts in general might go about assessing the quality of legislative debate about rights, and presents a set of criteria against which such debate can be assessed. While pushing at the boundaries of constitutional orthodoxy, this paper looks ahead to a framework of democratic dialogue where sovereignty is shared between courts, Parliament and other constitutional organs. In this context, it argues that courts ought to defer where certain criteria are met in the process of parliamentary deliberation on the rights questions which come before them.