论文部分内容阅读
将一般性宪法事件当作宪法案件处理,是当下“轻言违宪”现象的一种体现;这会导致宪法审查的功能被歪曲以及宪法的“过度规范”。解决方法之一是在宪法审查的入口处设置启动要件环节,通过形式性审查来筛选能够进入实质性审查的宪法案例,进而使有限的宪法审查资源得到有效利用,这也有利于维系宪法审查制度的合法性。在这一点上,启动要件较之受案范围具有更好的效果并可免受合宪性质疑。启动要件审查的宽严把握,直接影响着宪法审查门槛之高低,但这里的裁量并非恣意,在实定法框架中尚受多项因素的制约。
The handling of general constitutional events as constitutional cases is a manifestation of the phenomenon of “unconstitutionality” in the present situation; this will lead to the distortion of the function of constitutional review and “over-regulation” of the constitution. One of the solutions is to set up the essentials of the entrance of the constitutional review, to screen the constitutional cases that can enter the substantive examination through the formal examination, so that the limited resources for the constitutional review can be effectively used, which also helps maintain the constitutional review system The legitimacy of. At this point, the start-up requirements have a better effect than the scope of the case and can be challenged from the constitutionality. The strict control of the examination of the starting requirements directly affects the threshold of the constitutional review. However, the discretion here is not arbitrary and is subject to many factors in the framework of the FCL.