“Constituent Power” or Degrees of Legitimacy?

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
Vicki C. Jackson
{"title":"“Constituent Power” or Degrees of Legitimacy?","authors":"Vicki C. Jackson","doi":"10.1515/icl-2018-0068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Professor Roznai’s book is a terrifically executed account of a constitutional theory justifying the concept of unconstitutional constitutional amendments and the practice of judicial review thereof. The theory rests on the premise that constitutions are made by a ‘constituent power’, which establishes ‘constituted powers’ of the government and which expressly or implicitly defines the scope and nature of an amendment of the constitution. The powers of amendment are sui generis, situated between ‘original (or as he calls it “primary”) constituent power’ to make a constitution in the first place and the constituted powers of government under that constitution. The amendment power, he argues, should be understood as a delegated power, subject to the limitations, express or implicit, of the original constitution. Given his conceptual premise – that constitutions should be understood as created by a ‘constituent power’, a premise widely accepted in constitutional theory – his argument that the amending power lies between pure constituent power and purely constituted powers has great persuasive value. He rejects the claim that the amending power is a ‘constituent power’, arguing instead that the amending power possesses ‘characteristics of both constituent and constituted power’, and should be treated as sui generis. (Id at 112–13) He argues that the amending power should be understood both as bounded by the procedures set forth in the constitution for amendment and by a substantive constraint not to annihilate the fundamental political decisions of the constitution. In this respect, it should be understood as a ‘delegated’ power, neither an original constituent power nor simply a regular constituted power, but a power exercisable by or on","PeriodicalId":41321,"journal":{"name":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ICL Journal-Vienna Journal on International Constitutional Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/icl-2018-0068","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Professor Roznai’s book is a terrifically executed account of a constitutional theory justifying the concept of unconstitutional constitutional amendments and the practice of judicial review thereof. The theory rests on the premise that constitutions are made by a ‘constituent power’, which establishes ‘constituted powers’ of the government and which expressly or implicitly defines the scope and nature of an amendment of the constitution. The powers of amendment are sui generis, situated between ‘original (or as he calls it “primary”) constituent power’ to make a constitution in the first place and the constituted powers of government under that constitution. The amendment power, he argues, should be understood as a delegated power, subject to the limitations, express or implicit, of the original constitution. Given his conceptual premise – that constitutions should be understood as created by a ‘constituent power’, a premise widely accepted in constitutional theory – his argument that the amending power lies between pure constituent power and purely constituted powers has great persuasive value. He rejects the claim that the amending power is a ‘constituent power’, arguing instead that the amending power possesses ‘characteristics of both constituent and constituted power’, and should be treated as sui generis. (Id at 112–13) He argues that the amending power should be understood both as bounded by the procedures set forth in the constitution for amendment and by a substantive constraint not to annihilate the fundamental political decisions of the constitution. In this respect, it should be understood as a ‘delegated’ power, neither an original constituent power nor simply a regular constituted power, but a power exercisable by or on
“宪法权力”还是合法性程度?
Roznai教授的书是对宪法理论的一个非常出色的执行说明,该理论证明了违宪宪法修正案的概念及其司法审查的实践。该理论的前提是,宪法是由一个“组成权力”制定的,它确立了政府的“构成权力”,并明确或隐含地定义了宪法修正案的范围和性质。修正案的权力是自成一体的,位于最初制定宪法的“原始(或他所说的“主要”)组成权力”和宪法规定的政府权力之间。他认为,修宪权应该被理解为一种受原宪法明示或暗示的限制的授权。鉴于他的概念前提——宪法应被理解为由“制宪权力”创造,这是宪法理论中广泛接受的前提——他关于修改权力介于纯粹的制宪权力和纯粹的构成权力之间的论点具有很大的说服力。他驳斥了修改权是一种“构成权力”的说法,认为修改权具有“构成权力和构成权力的双重特征”,应该被视为自成一体。(同上,第112-13段)他认为,修改权力应被理解为既受宪法规定的修改程序的限制,又受不破坏宪法基本政治决定的实质性限制。在这方面,它应该被理解为一种“委托”的权力,既不是一种原始的构成权力,也不是一种简单的常规构成权力,而是一种由任何人行使的权力
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信