论文部分内容阅读
计算机制是决定社会救济标淮幅度的关键性因素,科学的计算机制依赖于对程序、价值、利益等维度复杂的取舍,传统被认为是立法机关的专属裁量界域,法院对结果仅具有限的审查权。德国联邦宪法法院2010年初“哈茨IV”案的判决既遵循了传统对结果的审慎审查,同时又对结果产生的计算机制进行了以恣意为切入点的实质性审查,并最终以实质性审查的结论推翻了先前合理性审查的结论,判决受到民众欢迎,但也引发了权力越界的争议。
The computer system is the key factor that determines the magnitude of social relief. The scientific computer system relies on the complicated choice of procedure, value and benefits. The tradition is regarded as the exclusive jurisdictional boundary of the legislature. The court has limited the result The right to review. The judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court in early 2010 “Hartz IV” not only follows the traditional cautious examination of the results, but also conducts a substantive examination of the calculation mechanism resulting from whatever is desired and ends up in substance The conclusion of the sexual review overthrew the conclusions of the previous rationality review, which was welcomed by the public but also triggered controversy over the transborder of power.