匈牙利基本法第四和第五次修正案后的宪法格局

Imre Vörös
{"title":"匈牙利基本法第四和第五次修正案后的宪法格局","authors":"Imre Vörös","doi":"10.1556/AJUR.55.2014.1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The essay analyses the fourth and fifth amendments of the Hungarian Fundamental Law with special respect to the opinion of the Venice Commission and the resolution of the European Parliament. It will be pointed out that the fourth amendment transferred several legal regulations into the Fundamental Law which were previously qualified as unconstitutional by the Hungarian Constitutional Court. The Fundamental Law contains at the same time the declaration of a fundamental right and the unconstitutional limitation of it by the latter regulation. The inconsistency is evident, therefore the Constitutional Court has to choose in the future between the contradictory constitutional regulations. A possibility to solve this dilemma could be the separation of the legal norms of the constitution as lex generalis (e.g. rule of law, human dignity) and lex specialis which could not derogate the lex generalis, and ca nnot be applied accordingly.","PeriodicalId":284706,"journal":{"name":"Acta Juridica Hungarica","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The constitutional landscape after the fourth and fifth amendments of Hungarian Fundamental Law\",\"authors\":\"Imre Vörös\",\"doi\":\"10.1556/AJUR.55.2014.1.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The essay analyses the fourth and fifth amendments of the Hungarian Fundamental Law with special respect to the opinion of the Venice Commission and the resolution of the European Parliament. It will be pointed out that the fourth amendment transferred several legal regulations into the Fundamental Law which were previously qualified as unconstitutional by the Hungarian Constitutional Court. The Fundamental Law contains at the same time the declaration of a fundamental right and the unconstitutional limitation of it by the latter regulation. The inconsistency is evident, therefore the Constitutional Court has to choose in the future between the contradictory constitutional regulations. A possibility to solve this dilemma could be the separation of the legal norms of the constitution as lex generalis (e.g. rule of law, human dignity) and lex specialis which could not derogate the lex generalis, and ca nnot be applied accordingly.\",\"PeriodicalId\":284706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Juridica Hungarica\",\"volume\":\"3 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Juridica Hungarica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1556/AJUR.55.2014.1.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Juridica Hungarica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1556/AJUR.55.2014.1.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

本文分析了匈牙利基本法的第四和第五修正案,特别考虑了威尼斯委员会的意见和欧洲议会的决议。应当指出的是,第四项修正案将若干法律条例纳入《基本法》,而这些条例以前被匈牙利宪法法院认定为违宪。《基本法》同时包含了对一项基本权利的宣布和后者规定对其的违宪限制。这种不一致性是显而易见的,因此,今后宪法法院必须在相互矛盾的宪法规定之间做出选择。解决这一困境的一种可能性是将宪法的法律规范分离为一般法(例如法治、人的尊严)和特别法,后者不能贬损一般法,也不能据此适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The constitutional landscape after the fourth and fifth amendments of Hungarian Fundamental Law
The essay analyses the fourth and fifth amendments of the Hungarian Fundamental Law with special respect to the opinion of the Venice Commission and the resolution of the European Parliament. It will be pointed out that the fourth amendment transferred several legal regulations into the Fundamental Law which were previously qualified as unconstitutional by the Hungarian Constitutional Court. The Fundamental Law contains at the same time the declaration of a fundamental right and the unconstitutional limitation of it by the latter regulation. The inconsistency is evident, therefore the Constitutional Court has to choose in the future between the contradictory constitutional regulations. A possibility to solve this dilemma could be the separation of the legal norms of the constitution as lex generalis (e.g. rule of law, human dignity) and lex specialis which could not derogate the lex generalis, and ca nnot be applied accordingly.
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信