禁止公共服务中的宗教象征:全球多元化视角下的魁北克21号法案

IF 0.8 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Frédéric Mégret
{"title":"禁止公共服务中的宗教象征:全球多元化视角下的魁北克21号法案","authors":"Frédéric Mégret","doi":"10.1017/S2045381721000265","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Bill 21 is a highly contested law adopted in Quebec that bans certain civil servants from wearing religious symbols in the exercise of their duties. Rather than analyse Bill 21 on its merits, the article treats it as a test case for global legal pluralism, examining how the validity of the law from an international perspective depends on the frames one uses to analyse it. It finds that a basic tension permeates the entire debate between a universalist vision of rights and a vision of rights as anchored in particular political configurations that demand a constant process of adaptation. That tension is visible in the dualist opposition between Canadian and international law; in the role of federalism as a significant mediating factor in the implementation of constitutional and international rights; and in the kind of majoritarian check on rights that manifests itself in the Canadian Charter of Rights’ ‘notwithstanding clause’. Throughout, the article explores how these tensions might be mediated in ways that do not simply oppose international and domestic law but seek to make the most of their interaction.","PeriodicalId":37136,"journal":{"name":"Global Constitutionalism","volume":"11 1","pages":"217 - 248"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ban on religious symbols in the public service: Quebec’s Bill 21 in a global pluralist perspective\",\"authors\":\"Frédéric Mégret\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S2045381721000265\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Bill 21 is a highly contested law adopted in Quebec that bans certain civil servants from wearing religious symbols in the exercise of their duties. Rather than analyse Bill 21 on its merits, the article treats it as a test case for global legal pluralism, examining how the validity of the law from an international perspective depends on the frames one uses to analyse it. It finds that a basic tension permeates the entire debate between a universalist vision of rights and a vision of rights as anchored in particular political configurations that demand a constant process of adaptation. That tension is visible in the dualist opposition between Canadian and international law; in the role of federalism as a significant mediating factor in the implementation of constitutional and international rights; and in the kind of majoritarian check on rights that manifests itself in the Canadian Charter of Rights’ ‘notwithstanding clause’. Throughout, the article explores how these tensions might be mediated in ways that do not simply oppose international and domestic law but seek to make the most of their interaction.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37136,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Constitutionalism\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"217 - 248\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Constitutionalism\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381721000265\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Constitutionalism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381721000265","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要法案21是魁北克省通过的一项备受争议的法律,禁止某些公务员在履行职责时佩戴宗教标志。文章没有分析《21号法案》的优点,而是将其视为全球法律多元化的测试案例,从国际角度考察法律的有效性如何取决于分析法律的框架。它发现,普遍主义的权利观和植根于需要不断适应的特定政治格局的权利观之间的整个辩论中都弥漫着一种基本的紧张关系。这种紧张关系在加拿大法律和国际法之间的二元对立中可见一斑;联邦制作为落实宪法和国际权利的重要中介因素的作用;以及体现在《加拿大权利宪章》“尽管有条款”中的那种多数派对权利的制约。在整个过程中,文章探讨了如何通过不简单地反对国际法和国内法,而是寻求充分利用其相互作用的方式来调解这些紧张局势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ban on religious symbols in the public service: Quebec’s Bill 21 in a global pluralist perspective
Abstract Bill 21 is a highly contested law adopted in Quebec that bans certain civil servants from wearing religious symbols in the exercise of their duties. Rather than analyse Bill 21 on its merits, the article treats it as a test case for global legal pluralism, examining how the validity of the law from an international perspective depends on the frames one uses to analyse it. It finds that a basic tension permeates the entire debate between a universalist vision of rights and a vision of rights as anchored in particular political configurations that demand a constant process of adaptation. That tension is visible in the dualist opposition between Canadian and international law; in the role of federalism as a significant mediating factor in the implementation of constitutional and international rights; and in the kind of majoritarian check on rights that manifests itself in the Canadian Charter of Rights’ ‘notwithstanding clause’. Throughout, the article explores how these tensions might be mediated in ways that do not simply oppose international and domestic law but seek to make the most of their interaction.
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
Global Constitutionalism
Global Constitutionalism Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
×
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