对公共服务概念的批判性思考

Luis Ortiz Zamora
{"title":"对公共服务概念的批判性思考","authors":"Luis Ortiz Zamora","doi":"10.32457/rjyd.v5i2.2026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The concept of public service is ambiguous. However, if it is examined from a historical point of view and concerning the fundamental rights of citizens, it is possible to specify its concept. Therefore, resuming the dialogue on the concept of public service is essential, as it constitutes an instrument that can even affect freedoms; for example, when, to justify the monopoly of vehicle technical inspection, that character is artificially assigned to the activity. Therefore, in this article we ask if it is possible, under the prism of legal science, to define a concept of public service.","PeriodicalId":309029,"journal":{"name":"Justicia &Derecho","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical thoughts about the concept of public service\",\"authors\":\"Luis Ortiz Zamora\",\"doi\":\"10.32457/rjyd.v5i2.2026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The concept of public service is ambiguous. However, if it is examined from a historical point of view and concerning the fundamental rights of citizens, it is possible to specify its concept. Therefore, resuming the dialogue on the concept of public service is essential, as it constitutes an instrument that can even affect freedoms; for example, when, to justify the monopoly of vehicle technical inspection, that character is artificially assigned to the activity. Therefore, in this article we ask if it is possible, under the prism of legal science, to define a concept of public service.\",\"PeriodicalId\":309029,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Justicia &Derecho\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Justicia &Derecho\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32457/rjyd.v5i2.2026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Justicia &Derecho","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32457/rjyd.v5i2.2026","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

公共服务的概念是模糊的。但是,如果从历史的角度和公民的基本权利来考察它,就有可能具体说明它的概念。因此,恢复关于公共服务概念的对话至关重要,因为它是一种甚至可以影响自由的工具;例如,为了证明对车辆技术检查的垄断是正当的,人为地赋予这项活动这种特征。因此,在本文中,我们要问的是,在法学的棱镜下,是否有可能定义一个公共服务的概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Critical thoughts about the concept of public service
The concept of public service is ambiguous. However, if it is examined from a historical point of view and concerning the fundamental rights of citizens, it is possible to specify its concept. Therefore, resuming the dialogue on the concept of public service is essential, as it constitutes an instrument that can even affect freedoms; for example, when, to justify the monopoly of vehicle technical inspection, that character is artificially assigned to the activity. Therefore, in this article we ask if it is possible, under the prism of legal science, to define a concept of public service.
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