假释与公共紧急事件:为什么应该废除维多利亚宪章规定

IF 1.2 Q1 LAW
J. Debeljak
{"title":"假释与公共紧急事件:为什么应该废除维多利亚宪章规定","authors":"J. Debeljak","doi":"10.53637/tmsv9345","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the override provision under the Victorian Charter. Relevantly, Parliament has used the override on two occasions regarding laws enacted to prevent parole being granted to prisoners except in extremely limited circumstances. Conversely, Parliament responded to the COVID-19 threat without resorting to temporarily suspending the Charter via an override. This article analyses the parole-setting uses of the override within the international context of the temporary suspension of rights, against the Charter mechanisms that allow for restrictions on rights, and against the principles underlying the Charter – the retention of parliamentary sovereignty and the creation of an inter-institutional dialogue about rights. These uses test the transparency of and accountability for rights-limiting decision-making, and the culture of justification the dialogue is supposed to engender. By way of contrast and conclusion, the article highlights the curiosity between the use of the override with parole legislation and the non-use of the override with COVID-19 legislation, and revisits the case to repeal the override.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Of Parole and Public Emergencies: Why the Victorian Charter Override Provision Should Be Repealed\",\"authors\":\"J. Debeljak\",\"doi\":\"10.53637/tmsv9345\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines the override provision under the Victorian Charter. Relevantly, Parliament has used the override on two occasions regarding laws enacted to prevent parole being granted to prisoners except in extremely limited circumstances. Conversely, Parliament responded to the COVID-19 threat without resorting to temporarily suspending the Charter via an override. This article analyses the parole-setting uses of the override within the international context of the temporary suspension of rights, against the Charter mechanisms that allow for restrictions on rights, and against the principles underlying the Charter – the retention of parliamentary sovereignty and the creation of an inter-institutional dialogue about rights. These uses test the transparency of and accountability for rights-limiting decision-making, and the culture of justification the dialogue is supposed to engender. By way of contrast and conclusion, the article highlights the curiosity between the use of the override with parole legislation and the non-use of the override with COVID-19 legislation, and revisits the case to repeal the override.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.53637/tmsv9345\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53637/tmsv9345","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本条审查了《维多利亚宪章》中的凌驾条款。与此相关的是,议会曾两次对为防止囚犯获得假释而颁布的法律使用否决权,除非在极为有限的情况下。相反,议会对新冠肺炎威胁作出了回应,没有通过越权暂时中止《宪章》。本文分析了在暂时中止权利的国际背景下,针对允许限制权利的《宪章》机制,以及针对《宪章》的基本原则——保留议会主权和建立关于权利的机构间对话——使用否决权的假释规定。这些用途考验了限制权利决策的透明度和问责制,以及对话应该产生的辩护文化。通过对比和总结,文章强调了在假释立法中使用否决权与在新冠肺炎立法中不使用否决权之间的好奇心,并重新审视了废除否决权的案例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Of Parole and Public Emergencies: Why the Victorian Charter Override Provision Should Be Repealed
This article examines the override provision under the Victorian Charter. Relevantly, Parliament has used the override on two occasions regarding laws enacted to prevent parole being granted to prisoners except in extremely limited circumstances. Conversely, Parliament responded to the COVID-19 threat without resorting to temporarily suspending the Charter via an override. This article analyses the parole-setting uses of the override within the international context of the temporary suspension of rights, against the Charter mechanisms that allow for restrictions on rights, and against the principles underlying the Charter – the retention of parliamentary sovereignty and the creation of an inter-institutional dialogue about rights. These uses test the transparency of and accountability for rights-limiting decision-making, and the culture of justification the dialogue is supposed to engender. By way of contrast and conclusion, the article highlights the curiosity between the use of the override with parole legislation and the non-use of the override with COVID-19 legislation, and revisits the case to repeal the override.
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
1.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
25
×
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