冈比亚和印度尼西亚宪法权利比较分析

Ousu Mendy
{"title":"冈比亚和印度尼西亚宪法权利比较分析","authors":"Ousu Mendy","doi":"10.25041/constitutionale.v4i1.2951","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While there is strong advocacy globally on human rights, little attention is paid to constitutional rights in some countries. Many constitutions contain constitutional rights, which are mainly referred to as the bill of rights in their constitutions. This piece presents a comparative exposition of the constitutional rights in The Gambia and Indonesia as constitutional states. Both countries are sovereign, and the strength and lethargy in enforcing these rights in these countries are of great significance in this research. In this research, empirical and normative research approaches are taken to examine both primary and secondary data. Primary materials like the constitutions of the two countries, legislation and court cases on constitutional rights are used. Secondary materials like articles and books are sufficiently used to support this research. Cognizant that a constitution is both a legal and political instrument, the Constitutional Court of Indonesia is undermined to a certain extent by both the House of Representatives and the Executive, and The Gambia’s sparing moments in disobeying High Court orders as regards constitutional rights, this research finally reaches an informed verdict that constitutional rights are different from human rights and approaches to their enhancement ought to be premised on citizenship. The inclusion of legal provisions in constitutions does not, ex cathedra, make institutions strong. Therefore, both countries need a paradigm shift in their national mechanisms to strengthen the institutions that enforce these rights despite the institutional differences in socio-political and socio-legal structures. To do this, the constitutional defense bodies must be comparatively autonomous from other institutions exercising the legislative, executive, and judicial functions to carry out such activities to increase individuals’ and States’ respect for the constitutions and the law and the constitutional rights guaranteed by these constitutions will make fresh and significant strides. ","PeriodicalId":52591,"journal":{"name":"Constitutionale","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparative Analysis of Constitutional Rights in the Gambia and Indonesia\",\"authors\":\"Ousu Mendy\",\"doi\":\"10.25041/constitutionale.v4i1.2951\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While there is strong advocacy globally on human rights, little attention is paid to constitutional rights in some countries. Many constitutions contain constitutional rights, which are mainly referred to as the bill of rights in their constitutions. This piece presents a comparative exposition of the constitutional rights in The Gambia and Indonesia as constitutional states. Both countries are sovereign, and the strength and lethargy in enforcing these rights in these countries are of great significance in this research. In this research, empirical and normative research approaches are taken to examine both primary and secondary data. Primary materials like the constitutions of the two countries, legislation and court cases on constitutional rights are used. Secondary materials like articles and books are sufficiently used to support this research. Cognizant that a constitution is both a legal and political instrument, the Constitutional Court of Indonesia is undermined to a certain extent by both the House of Representatives and the Executive, and The Gambia’s sparing moments in disobeying High Court orders as regards constitutional rights, this research finally reaches an informed verdict that constitutional rights are different from human rights and approaches to their enhancement ought to be premised on citizenship. The inclusion of legal provisions in constitutions does not, ex cathedra, make institutions strong. Therefore, both countries need a paradigm shift in their national mechanisms to strengthen the institutions that enforce these rights despite the institutional differences in socio-political and socio-legal structures. To do this, the constitutional defense bodies must be comparatively autonomous from other institutions exercising the legislative, executive, and judicial functions to carry out such activities to increase individuals’ and States’ respect for the constitutions and the law and the constitutional rights guaranteed by these constitutions will make fresh and significant strides. \",\"PeriodicalId\":52591,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Constitutionale\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Constitutionale\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25041/constitutionale.v4i1.2951\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Constitutionale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25041/constitutionale.v4i1.2951","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

尽管全球都大力倡导人权,但一些国家很少关注宪法权利。许多宪法都包含宪法权利,这些权利在其宪法中主要被称为权利法案。这篇文章对冈比亚和印度尼西亚作为宪法国家的宪法权利进行了比较阐述。这两个国家都是主权国家,在这些国家执行这些权利的力度和无精打采在这项研究中具有重要意义。在这项研究中,采用了实证和规范研究的方法来检验初级和次级数据。使用了两国宪法、关于宪法权利的立法和法院案例等主要材料。文章和书籍等次要材料被充分用于支持这项研究。认识到宪法既是法律工具又是政治工具,印度尼西亚宪法法院在一定程度上受到众议院和行政部门的破坏,冈比亚在宪法权利方面不遗余力地违反高等法院的命令,这项研究最终得出了一个知情的结论,即宪法权利与人权不同,增强宪法权利的方法应该以公民身份为前提。在宪法中纳入法律条款并不能使制度变得强大。因此,尽管社会政治和社会法律结构存在体制差异,但两国都需要在国家机制中进行范式转变,以加强执行这些权利的机构。为此,宪法辩护机构必须相对独立于行使立法、行政和司法职能的其他机构,开展此类活动,以提高个人和国家对宪法和法律的尊重,这些宪法保障的宪法权利将取得新的重大进展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Comparative Analysis of Constitutional Rights in the Gambia and Indonesia
While there is strong advocacy globally on human rights, little attention is paid to constitutional rights in some countries. Many constitutions contain constitutional rights, which are mainly referred to as the bill of rights in their constitutions. This piece presents a comparative exposition of the constitutional rights in The Gambia and Indonesia as constitutional states. Both countries are sovereign, and the strength and lethargy in enforcing these rights in these countries are of great significance in this research. In this research, empirical and normative research approaches are taken to examine both primary and secondary data. Primary materials like the constitutions of the two countries, legislation and court cases on constitutional rights are used. Secondary materials like articles and books are sufficiently used to support this research. Cognizant that a constitution is both a legal and political instrument, the Constitutional Court of Indonesia is undermined to a certain extent by both the House of Representatives and the Executive, and The Gambia’s sparing moments in disobeying High Court orders as regards constitutional rights, this research finally reaches an informed verdict that constitutional rights are different from human rights and approaches to their enhancement ought to be premised on citizenship. The inclusion of legal provisions in constitutions does not, ex cathedra, make institutions strong. Therefore, both countries need a paradigm shift in their national mechanisms to strengthen the institutions that enforce these rights despite the institutional differences in socio-political and socio-legal structures. To do this, the constitutional defense bodies must be comparatively autonomous from other institutions exercising the legislative, executive, and judicial functions to carry out such activities to increase individuals’ and States’ respect for the constitutions and the law and the constitutional rights guaranteed by these constitutions will make fresh and significant strides. 
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
3
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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