经济和社会权利

M. Langford, E. Rosevear
{"title":"经济和社会权利","authors":"M. Langford, E. Rosevear","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3595167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"No longer the poor cousin of civil rights, socio-economic rights have steadily found a place in constitutions and jurisprudence across the world. Asia represents, however, a paradox in this development. While the sub-region of South Asia was the site of many early social rights adjudication experiments, East and South-East Asia are only outmatched by Arab States in their reluctance to recognize and judicialize socio-economic rights (and even the right to property). Fitting seamlessly with the region’s embedded mercantilist model of capitalism, it is the most conservative region in the world when it comes to core rights in the workplace – such as the right to strike or fair wage. Courts are held generally on a tight constitutional leash with limited recognition of the judiciary’s competence to enforce socio-economic rights and judges have been less willing than their South Asian counterparts to break constitutional lines. While some features are consistent across the entire region, such as hostility to international oversight of socio-economic rights, there is significant variation in terms of ESR entrenchment and interpretation. In this chapter, we analyze the macro patterns of constitutional recognition and judicial posture across the region (mostly with the help of the TIESR database) and some of the key patterns and puzzles in constitutional enforcement across the region. We conclude with some reflections on the impact of constitutionalising ESR rights in the region in light of the existing empirical evidence. <br>","PeriodicalId":306856,"journal":{"name":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","volume":"117 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Economic and Social Rights\",\"authors\":\"M. Langford, E. Rosevear\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3595167\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"No longer the poor cousin of civil rights, socio-economic rights have steadily found a place in constitutions and jurisprudence across the world. Asia represents, however, a paradox in this development. While the sub-region of South Asia was the site of many early social rights adjudication experiments, East and South-East Asia are only outmatched by Arab States in their reluctance to recognize and judicialize socio-economic rights (and even the right to property). Fitting seamlessly with the region’s embedded mercantilist model of capitalism, it is the most conservative region in the world when it comes to core rights in the workplace – such as the right to strike or fair wage. Courts are held generally on a tight constitutional leash with limited recognition of the judiciary’s competence to enforce socio-economic rights and judges have been less willing than their South Asian counterparts to break constitutional lines. While some features are consistent across the entire region, such as hostility to international oversight of socio-economic rights, there is significant variation in terms of ESR entrenchment and interpretation. In this chapter, we analyze the macro patterns of constitutional recognition and judicial posture across the region (mostly with the help of the TIESR database) and some of the key patterns and puzzles in constitutional enforcement across the region. We conclude with some reflections on the impact of constitutionalising ESR rights in the region in light of the existing empirical evidence. <br>\",\"PeriodicalId\":306856,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal\",\"volume\":\"117 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3595167\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Economic Inequality & the Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3595167","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

不再民权的穷亲戚,社会经济权利不断发现在世界各地的宪法和法律。然而,亚洲在这一发展过程中呈现出一种悖论。虽然南亚次区域是许多早期社会权利裁决试验的地点,但只有阿拉伯国家不愿承认社会经济权利(甚至财产权)并将其司法化,这一点才比东亚和东南亚强。与该地区根深蒂固的重商主义资本主义模式完美契合,在工作场所的核心权利(如罢工权或公平工资)方面,它是世界上最保守的地区。法院通常受到严格的宪法约束,对司法机构执行社会经济权利的能力的认可有限,法官不像南亚同行那样愿意打破宪法界限。虽然整个地区的一些特征是一致的,例如对国际社会经济权利监督的敌意,但在维护和解释ESR方面存在重大差异。在本章中,我们分析了整个地区的宪法承认和司法态势的宏观模式(主要借助TIESR数据库),以及整个地区宪法执行的一些关键模式和困惑。最后,根据现有的经验证据,我们对宪法化ESR权利在该地区的影响进行了一些反思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Economic and Social Rights
No longer the poor cousin of civil rights, socio-economic rights have steadily found a place in constitutions and jurisprudence across the world. Asia represents, however, a paradox in this development. While the sub-region of South Asia was the site of many early social rights adjudication experiments, East and South-East Asia are only outmatched by Arab States in their reluctance to recognize and judicialize socio-economic rights (and even the right to property). Fitting seamlessly with the region’s embedded mercantilist model of capitalism, it is the most conservative region in the world when it comes to core rights in the workplace – such as the right to strike or fair wage. Courts are held generally on a tight constitutional leash with limited recognition of the judiciary’s competence to enforce socio-economic rights and judges have been less willing than their South Asian counterparts to break constitutional lines. While some features are consistent across the entire region, such as hostility to international oversight of socio-economic rights, there is significant variation in terms of ESR entrenchment and interpretation. In this chapter, we analyze the macro patterns of constitutional recognition and judicial posture across the region (mostly with the help of the TIESR database) and some of the key patterns and puzzles in constitutional enforcement across the region. We conclude with some reflections on the impact of constitutionalising ESR rights in the region in light of the existing empirical evidence.
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