司法机构的通讯

Kristóf Benedek Fekete
{"title":"司法机构的通讯","authors":"Kristóf Benedek Fekete","doi":"10.15170/studia.2023.01.01","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author describes the limitations of the freedom of expression of judges and courts in the context of the fundamental right to freedom of expression, which, due to its prominent position in a democratic constitutional state, is limited in content compared to the general one, also in view of the historical precedents in Hungary. Starting from the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and in the light of the practice of the Venice Commission and the European Court of Human Rights, the study outlines and analyses the possibilities for individual judges and courts to express their opinions. The paper presents, through a number of pragmatic examples, the prevailing practice in Hungary on the subject under study, which works with undoubtedly one of the most stringent regulatory solutions.","PeriodicalId":231331,"journal":{"name":"Essays of Faculty of Law University of Pécs, Yearbook of [year]","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communication of the Judiciary\",\"authors\":\"Kristóf Benedek Fekete\",\"doi\":\"10.15170/studia.2023.01.01\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The author describes the limitations of the freedom of expression of judges and courts in the context of the fundamental right to freedom of expression, which, due to its prominent position in a democratic constitutional state, is limited in content compared to the general one, also in view of the historical precedents in Hungary. Starting from the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and in the light of the practice of the Venice Commission and the European Court of Human Rights, the study outlines and analyses the possibilities for individual judges and courts to express their opinions. The paper presents, through a number of pragmatic examples, the prevailing practice in Hungary on the subject under study, which works with undoubtedly one of the most stringent regulatory solutions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":231331,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Essays of Faculty of Law University of Pécs, Yearbook of [year]\",\"volume\":\"48 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Essays of Faculty of Law University of Pécs, Yearbook of [year]\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15170/studia.2023.01.01\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Essays of Faculty of Law University of Pécs, Yearbook of [year]","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15170/studia.2023.01.01","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

发件人叙述了法官和法院在言论自由的基本权利范围内的言论自由的限制,由于其在民主宪政国家的突出地位,与一般权利相比,内容有限,也考虑到匈牙利的历史先例。本研究从有关的宪法和法律规定出发,并参照威尼斯委员会和欧洲人权法院的做法,概述和分析了个别法官和法院表达意见的可能性。本文通过一些务实的例子,介绍了匈牙利对所研究主题的普遍做法,这种做法无疑是最严格的监管解决方案之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Communication of the Judiciary
The author describes the limitations of the freedom of expression of judges and courts in the context of the fundamental right to freedom of expression, which, due to its prominent position in a democratic constitutional state, is limited in content compared to the general one, also in view of the historical precedents in Hungary. Starting from the relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and in the light of the practice of the Venice Commission and the European Court of Human Rights, the study outlines and analyses the possibilities for individual judges and courts to express their opinions. The paper presents, through a number of pragmatic examples, the prevailing practice in Hungary on the subject under study, which works with undoubtedly one of the most stringent regulatory solutions.
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