首次违反伊斯兰教法规定:埃及最高法院2006年1月15日对第113/xxvi号案件的裁决(注释及翻译)

IF 0.5 Q3 LAW
G. Parolin
{"title":"首次违反伊斯兰教法规定:埃及最高法院2006年1月15日对第113/xxvi号案件的裁决(注释及翻译)","authors":"G. Parolin","doi":"10.1163/15730255-bja10141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nIn early 2006, Egypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court found a statutory provision in force at the time of the decision to be in violation of the constitutional provision declaring the principles of Islamic law the chief source of legislation (Article 2). It was the first time since the provision was originally introduced in the Constitution in 1971 and later amended in 1980. Since this ruling, the Court found another two statutory provisions to be in violation of the sharia provision in the latter’s five decades of operation, in 2013 and in 2021. In the ruling considered here, the Court confirmed its conventional construction of Article 2, but took a position on a critical and contentious device of legal reform: Can legal change be produced through procedural expedients? Ultimately, the Court had to answer another and even more fundamental question: Can the legislator deny legal effects to a religiously valid act like unilateral divorce (ṭalāq)?","PeriodicalId":43925,"journal":{"name":"Arab Law Quarterly","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A First Violation of the Sharia Provision: Egypt’s SCC’s Ruling of 15 January 2006, in the Case No. 113/xxvi (Annotated and Translated)\",\"authors\":\"G. Parolin\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/15730255-bja10141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nIn early 2006, Egypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court found a statutory provision in force at the time of the decision to be in violation of the constitutional provision declaring the principles of Islamic law the chief source of legislation (Article 2). It was the first time since the provision was originally introduced in the Constitution in 1971 and later amended in 1980. Since this ruling, the Court found another two statutory provisions to be in violation of the sharia provision in the latter’s five decades of operation, in 2013 and in 2021. In the ruling considered here, the Court confirmed its conventional construction of Article 2, but took a position on a critical and contentious device of legal reform: Can legal change be produced through procedural expedients? Ultimately, the Court had to answer another and even more fundamental question: Can the legislator deny legal effects to a religiously valid act like unilateral divorce (ṭalāq)?\",\"PeriodicalId\":43925,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arab Law Quarterly\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arab Law Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730255-bja10141\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arab Law Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15730255-bja10141","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2006年初,埃及最高宪法法院裁定,在作出裁决时生效的一项法定条款违反了宣布伊斯兰教法原则为立法主要来源的宪法条款(第2条)。这是自1971年宪法首次引入该条款并于1980年进行修改以来的第一次。自这一裁决以来,法院在2013年和2021年裁定,在伊斯兰教法实施的50年里,又有两项法定条款违反了伊斯兰教法的规定。在这里考虑的裁决中,最高法院确认了其对第2条的传统解释,但对法律改革的一个关键和有争议的手段采取了立场:能否通过程序上的权宜之计产生法律变革?最终,最高法院必须回答另一个甚至更根本的问题:立法者能否否认宗教上有效的行为,如单方面离婚(ṭalāq)的法律效力?
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A First Violation of the Sharia Provision: Egypt’s SCC’s Ruling of 15 January 2006, in the Case No. 113/xxvi (Annotated and Translated)
In early 2006, Egypt’s Supreme Constitutional Court found a statutory provision in force at the time of the decision to be in violation of the constitutional provision declaring the principles of Islamic law the chief source of legislation (Article 2). It was the first time since the provision was originally introduced in the Constitution in 1971 and later amended in 1980. Since this ruling, the Court found another two statutory provisions to be in violation of the sharia provision in the latter’s five decades of operation, in 2013 and in 2021. In the ruling considered here, the Court confirmed its conventional construction of Article 2, but took a position on a critical and contentious device of legal reform: Can legal change be produced through procedural expedients? Ultimately, the Court had to answer another and even more fundamental question: Can the legislator deny legal effects to a religiously valid act like unilateral divorce (ṭalāq)?
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
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
33.30%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The leading English-language legal publication in its field, Arab Law Quarterly covers all aspects of Arab laws, both Shari"a and secular. Now in its third decade, it provides an important forum of authoritative articles on the laws and legal developments throughout the twenty countries of the Arab world, notes on recent legislation and case law, guidelines on future changes, and reviews of the latest literature in the field. Particular subject areas covered are Arab laws in trans-national affairs, commercial law, Islamic law (the Shari´a), and international comparative law.
×
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