决定南非法律中具有普遍公共重要性的非宪法事项:是否可以使用宪法价值?

Paul Nkoane
{"title":"决定南非法律中具有普遍公共重要性的非宪法事项:是否可以使用宪法价值?","authors":"Paul Nkoane","doi":"10.17159/2077-4907/2021/ldd.v25.21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 is supreme. It can be used to assess the soundness of various policies and laws. This statement has however been challenged based on the apparent limited range of the provisions of the Constitution. The Bill of Rights enshrined in the Constitution comprises of dedicated rules intended to address certain issues. Owing to this supposed limitation, some have questioned the tag of supremacy attached to the Constitution. The article examines how the Constitutional Court has decided issues which did not raise clear constitutional questions to determine whether values could be used to decide various issues of law. This determination, similarly, informs whether constitutional values could be used to administer matters of general public importance that are not founded on clear constitutional questions.","PeriodicalId":341103,"journal":{"name":"Law, Democracy and Development","volume":"104 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deciding non-constitutional matters of general public importance in South African law: can constitutional values be used?\",\"authors\":\"Paul Nkoane\",\"doi\":\"10.17159/2077-4907/2021/ldd.v25.21\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 is supreme. It can be used to assess the soundness of various policies and laws. This statement has however been challenged based on the apparent limited range of the provisions of the Constitution. The Bill of Rights enshrined in the Constitution comprises of dedicated rules intended to address certain issues. Owing to this supposed limitation, some have questioned the tag of supremacy attached to the Constitution. The article examines how the Constitutional Court has decided issues which did not raise clear constitutional questions to determine whether values could be used to decide various issues of law. This determination, similarly, informs whether constitutional values could be used to administer matters of general public importance that are not founded on clear constitutional questions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":341103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law, Democracy and Development\",\"volume\":\"104 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law, Democracy and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17159/2077-4907/2021/ldd.v25.21\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law, Democracy and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2077-4907/2021/ldd.v25.21","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1996年南非共和国宪法具有最高效力。它可以用来评估各种政策和法律的合理性。然而,这一说法受到了质疑,理由是《宪法》规定的范围显然有限。《宪法》所载的《权利法案》包括旨在解决某些问题的专门规则。由于这种所谓的限制,一些人质疑宪法所附加的至高无上的标签。本文探讨了宪法法院如何裁决没有引起明确宪法问题的问题,以确定是否可以用价值观来决定各种法律问题。同样,这一决定也说明了宪法价值是否可以用于管理不以明确的宪法问题为基础的具有普遍公共重要性的事项。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Deciding non-constitutional matters of general public importance in South African law: can constitutional values be used?
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 is supreme. It can be used to assess the soundness of various policies and laws. This statement has however been challenged based on the apparent limited range of the provisions of the Constitution. The Bill of Rights enshrined in the Constitution comprises of dedicated rules intended to address certain issues. Owing to this supposed limitation, some have questioned the tag of supremacy attached to the Constitution. The article examines how the Constitutional Court has decided issues which did not raise clear constitutional questions to determine whether values could be used to decide various issues of law. This determination, similarly, informs whether constitutional values could be used to administer matters of general public importance that are not founded on clear constitutional questions.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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