【摘要】：本文以日本戰(zhàn)后法制改革的歷史經(jīng)驗(yàn)為線索,考察和分析了對憲法實(shí)施監(jiān)督的不同觀點(diǎn)以及各種制度設(shè)計方案。從集中型違憲審查的奧地利模式和德國模式,到非集中型違憲審查的美國模式,還有結(jié)合法院和議會兩種監(jiān)督機(jī)制的混合模式,都曾經(jīng)成為日本法律界斟酌和比較的選項(xiàng)。因?yàn)檎误w制、文化傳統(tǒng)以及制度配套條件等因素的影響,美國式分散違憲審查制度在日本實(shí)施的效果沒有達(dá)到預(yù)期目標(biāo),導(dǎo)致司法消極主義伸張,所以近年來日本開始重新考慮設(shè)立憲法法院之議。
[Abstract]:Based on the historical experience of Japan's legal reform after the war, this paper investigates and analyzes the different viewpoints of the supervision of the constitution and the design of various systems. From the Austrian model and the German model of centralized unconstitutional review to the United States model of non-centralized unconstitutional review, as well as the mixed model combining the two kinds of supervisory mechanisms of courts and parliaments, they have been considered and compared by the Japanese legal profession. Because of the influence of the political system, the cultural tradition and the matching conditions of the system, the effect of the American-style decentralized unconstitutional review system in Japan has not reached the expected goal, leading to the justice negativism. So in recent years Japan has reconsidered the idea of a constitutional court.
【作者單位】： 上海交通大學(xué)凱原法學(xué)院;
【分類號】：D931.3;DD911

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 陳為邦;城市結(jié)構(gòu)模式小議[J];w，

本文編號：2119237