在立法草案中加入定义:必要还是奢侈?

Mazahib Pub Date : 2023-05-14 DOI:10.21093/mj.v22i1.5298
Souad Ezzerouali, Yassine Chami
{"title":"在立法草案中加入定义:必要还是奢侈?","authors":"Souad Ezzerouali, Yassine Chami","doi":"10.21093/mj.v22i1.5298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Legislative drafting is a crucial element in the formation of legal norms. The success of these norms depends on the accuracy of the words used and the appropriateness of its tools, as it is subject to a set of rules and mechanisms that the legislator must follow, whether at the level of form or at the level of content. Our study will focus on the rule related to using definitions in the exact way to include them in the legislative drafting. It aims to standardize the terms used by the legislator in the legal text in order to avoid any confusion or ambiguity about these terms, and to distinguish it from other meanings that may come in other texts but in a different concepts. The research problem revolves around the extent to which legislation needs to include definitions in laws, is it a necessity or just a luxury? We will address this problem using the descriptive and comparative approach by dividing the study into two parts, the first part deal with the need to include definitions in laws, and the second part addresses the norms governing the use of definitions in legislative drafting. We conclude, that adding a legal definition to the legislative process, giving it legal meaning, would perpetuate the rigid, ossified concept of law. Contrast that with jurisprudential definitions, which sometimes change the true meaning of jurists' terms. However, each definition will be kept in line with the pace of legislation to keep up with the pace of social development, in case it becomes outdated or needs to be supplemented. \nKeywords: legal drafting, definitions, improvement of law, legal security.","PeriodicalId":31362,"journal":{"name":"Mazahib","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Inclusion of Definitions in Legislative Drafting: A Necessity or a Luxury?\",\"authors\":\"Souad Ezzerouali, Yassine Chami\",\"doi\":\"10.21093/mj.v22i1.5298\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Legislative drafting is a crucial element in the formation of legal norms. The success of these norms depends on the accuracy of the words used and the appropriateness of its tools, as it is subject to a set of rules and mechanisms that the legislator must follow, whether at the level of form or at the level of content. Our study will focus on the rule related to using definitions in the exact way to include them in the legislative drafting. It aims to standardize the terms used by the legislator in the legal text in order to avoid any confusion or ambiguity about these terms, and to distinguish it from other meanings that may come in other texts but in a different concepts. The research problem revolves around the extent to which legislation needs to include definitions in laws, is it a necessity or just a luxury? We will address this problem using the descriptive and comparative approach by dividing the study into two parts, the first part deal with the need to include definitions in laws, and the second part addresses the norms governing the use of definitions in legislative drafting. We conclude, that adding a legal definition to the legislative process, giving it legal meaning, would perpetuate the rigid, ossified concept of law. Contrast that with jurisprudential definitions, which sometimes change the true meaning of jurists' terms. However, each definition will be kept in line with the pace of legislation to keep up with the pace of social development, in case it becomes outdated or needs to be supplemented. \\nKeywords: legal drafting, definitions, improvement of law, legal security.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31362,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mazahib\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mazahib\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21093/mj.v22i1.5298\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mazahib","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21093/mj.v22i1.5298","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

立法起草是法律规范形成的重要环节。这些规范的成功取决于所使用的词语的准确性及其工具的适当性,因为它受制于立法者必须遵循的一套规则和机制,无论是在形式层面还是在内容层面。我们的研究将重点放在如何准确地使用定义,以便将其纳入立法起草中。它的目的是规范立法者在法律文本中使用的术语,以避免对这些术语的任何混淆或歧义,并将其与其他文本中不同概念中可能出现的其他含义区分开来。研究问题围绕立法需要在法律中包含定义的程度,它是必要的还是只是一种奢侈?我们将采用描述性和比较性的方法来解决这个问题,将研究分为两部分,第一部分讨论在法律中纳入定义的必要性,第二部分讨论在立法起草中使用定义的规范。我们的结论是,给立法程序加上一个法律定义,赋予它法律意义,将使僵化、僵化的法律概念永久化。这与法理学的定义形成对比,法理学的定义有时会改变法学家术语的真正含义。然而,每一个定义都将与立法的步伐保持一致,以跟上社会发展的步伐,以防其过时或需要补充。关键词:法律起草,定义,法律完善,法律保障。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Inclusion of Definitions in Legislative Drafting: A Necessity or a Luxury?
Legislative drafting is a crucial element in the formation of legal norms. The success of these norms depends on the accuracy of the words used and the appropriateness of its tools, as it is subject to a set of rules and mechanisms that the legislator must follow, whether at the level of form or at the level of content. Our study will focus on the rule related to using definitions in the exact way to include them in the legislative drafting. It aims to standardize the terms used by the legislator in the legal text in order to avoid any confusion or ambiguity about these terms, and to distinguish it from other meanings that may come in other texts but in a different concepts. The research problem revolves around the extent to which legislation needs to include definitions in laws, is it a necessity or just a luxury? We will address this problem using the descriptive and comparative approach by dividing the study into two parts, the first part deal with the need to include definitions in laws, and the second part addresses the norms governing the use of definitions in legislative drafting. We conclude, that adding a legal definition to the legislative process, giving it legal meaning, would perpetuate the rigid, ossified concept of law. Contrast that with jurisprudential definitions, which sometimes change the true meaning of jurists' terms. However, each definition will be kept in line with the pace of legislation to keep up with the pace of social development, in case it becomes outdated or needs to be supplemented. Keywords: legal drafting, definitions, improvement of law, legal security.
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
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
4 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