【摘要】：憲法解釋是保障憲法實(shí)施的重要手段,憲法解釋主體的選擇則是進(jìn)行憲法解釋的前提條件。在憲法實(shí)際上發(fā)揮作用比較好的國(guó)家,一般都建立了專(zhuān)門(mén)的憲法解釋機(jī)關(guān)。例如英國(guó)是由議會(huì)解釋?xiě)椃?美國(guó)是由普通法院負(fù)責(zé)解釋?xiě)椃?法國(guó)設(shè)立了憲法委員會(huì)監(jiān)督憲法實(shí)施,德國(guó)則設(shè)立了憲法法院承擔(dān)憲法解釋的職責(zé)。 我國(guó)憲法明確規(guī)定由全國(guó)人大常委會(huì)解釋?xiě)椃�、監(jiān)督憲法的實(shí)施。但由于種種原因,全國(guó)人大常委會(huì)至今從未針對(duì)具體案件進(jìn)行憲法解釋,致使憲法解釋權(quán)長(zhǎng)期處于虛置狀態(tài)。這不得不讓人深思：如何使憲法解釋權(quán)在我國(guó)憲政實(shí)踐中真正發(fā)揮作用,而不僅僅只存在于憲法條文的規(guī)定。在考慮我國(guó)具體國(guó)情并借鑒其他國(guó)家經(jīng)驗(yàn)的基礎(chǔ)上,我們認(rèn)為應(yīng)在全國(guó)人大之下設(shè)立專(zhuān)門(mén)的憲法法院來(lái)行使違憲審查和憲法解釋的職權(quán),以保障憲法實(shí)施和維護(hù)公民基本權(quán)利。 本論文共分為四個(gè)部分。第一部分主要論述憲法解釋主體的理論基礎(chǔ),包括對(duì)憲法解釋和憲法解釋主體概念的界定以及目前憲法解釋主體的理論分歧。第二部分主要介紹了世界目前三種憲法解釋主體模式—英國(guó)的立法機(jī)關(guān)解釋模式、美國(guó)的普通法院解釋模式和法德的專(zhuān)門(mén)機(jī)關(guān)解釋模式,通過(guò)對(duì)這三種解釋模式的比較分析可以看出都各有利弊,我國(guó)不可盲目照抄照搬。第三部分主要是對(duì)我國(guó)憲法解釋主體的現(xiàn)狀分析,并指出我國(guó)憲法解釋存在的主要問(wèn)題。第二部分和第三部分是本論文的重點(diǎn)。第四部分是從理論和實(shí)踐的角度分析我國(guó)應(yīng)建立專(zhuān)門(mén)的憲法法院進(jìn)行憲法解釋,在借鑒德國(guó)模式的基礎(chǔ)上對(duì)我國(guó)憲法法院的具體設(shè)置(包括憲法法院的法律地位、作用、管轄權(quán)和運(yùn)行程序)做了理論探討。
[Abstract]:Constitutional interpretation is an important means to guarantee the implementation of constitution, and the choice of the subject of constitutional interpretation is the precondition of constitutional interpretation. In countries where constitutions actually play a better role, special constitutional interpretation organs are generally established. For example, in Britain, it is the parliament that interprets the constitution, in the United States, the ordinary courts are responsible for the interpretation of the constitution. The Constitution clearly stipulates that the standing Committee of the National people's Congress shall interpret the Constitution and supervise its implementation. However, due to various reasons, the standing Committee of the National people's Congress has never carried out the constitutional interpretation of specific cases, resulting in the power of interpretation of the Constitution has been in a state of nothingness for a long time. This has to make people ponder: how to make the power of interpretation of constitution play a real role in the practice of constitutionalism in our country, and not only exist in the provisions of the constitution. On the basis of considering the specific conditions of our country and drawing lessons from the experiences of other countries, we believe that a special constitutional court should be set up under the NPC to exercise the functions of reviewing and interpreting the Constitution in order to guarantee the implementation of the Constitution and safeguard the basic rights of citizens. This thesis is divided into four parts. The first part mainly discusses the theoretical basis of the main body of constitutional interpretation, including the definition of the subject of constitutional interpretation and the definition of the subject of constitutional interpretation, as well as the theoretical differences of the subject of constitutional interpretation at present. The second part mainly introduces three models of the main body of constitutional interpretation in the world, namely, the British legislative interpretation model, the American common court interpretation model and the French and German specialized agency interpretation model. Through the comparative analysis of these three modes of interpretation, we can see that there are advantages and disadvantages in our country not to copy blindly. The third part mainly analyzes the present situation of the main body of constitutional interpretation in our country, and points out the main problems existing in the interpretation of constitution in our country. The second part and the third part are the emphases of this thesis. The fourth part is from the theory and the practice angle analysis our country should establish the special constitution court to carry on the constitution explanation, in the reference Germany model foundation to our country constitution court concrete establishment (including the constitution court legal status, the function. Jurisdiction and operation procedure) are discussed in theory.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D921

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 唐杏湘;;對(duì)我國(guó)憲法解釋程序中幾個(gè)問(wèn)題的探討[J];重慶郵電學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2006年02期

2 胡錦光,王叢虎;論我國(guó)憲法解釋的實(shí)踐[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2000年02期

3 韓大元,張翔;試論憲法解釋的界限[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2001年01期

4 周偉;各國(guó)憲法解釋機(jī)關(guān)簡(jiǎn)介[J];人大研究;2004年08期

5 夏澤祥,施嵩;何謂憲法解釋?[J];山東社會(huì)科學(xué);2005年06期

6 蔡定劍;劉星紅;;論立法解釋[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);1993年06期

7 王廣輝;憲法解釋與憲法理解[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2001年04期

8 周偉;憲法解釋案例實(shí)證問(wèn)題研究[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2002年02期

9 苗連營(yíng);中國(guó)憲法解釋體制反思[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2002年06期

10 范進(jìn)學(xué);憲法解釋主體論[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2004年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 寧軍;我國(guó)憲法解釋主體模式的最優(yōu)選擇[D];吉林大學(xué);2007年

2 周露露;憲法解釋主體論[D];南京師范大學(xué);2007年

3 李宇;論憲法解釋的主體[D];延邊大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：2317150