Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Constitutional revisionism.
Статті в журналах з теми "Constitutional revisionism"
Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями
Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Constitutional revisionism".
Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.
Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.
Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.
1
Zuckert, Michael P. "JUDICIAL LIBERALISM AND CAPITALISM: JUSTICE FIELD RECONSIDERED." Social Philosophy and Policy 28, no. 2 (May 31, 2011): 102–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0265052510000233.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractJustice Stephen J. Field was the champion of a form of liberalism often said to be especially friendly to capitalism, the approach to the Constitution traditionally identified with “Lochnerism,” i.e., a laissez-faire oriented judicial activism. More recently a form of judicial revisionism has arisen, challenging the accepted descriptions of “Lochnerism” and of Field's jurisprudence. This article is an attempt to extend the revisionist approach by arriving at a more satisfactory understanding of the grounding of Field's jurisprudence in the natural rights philosophy. Field, it turns out, orienting around natural rights, was not so unambiguously friendly to capitalism as previous generations of scholars maintained, but his approach is surely friendlier than the constitutional theories that have replaced natural rights since Field's day.
2
Olken, Samuel R., and G. Edward White. "Historical Revisionism and Constitutional Change: Understanding the New Deal Court." Virginia Law Review 88, no. 1 (March 2002): 265. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1073976.
Повний текст джерела
3
Pangalangan, Raphael Lorenzo A., Gemmo Bautista Fernandez, and Ruby Rosselle L. Tugade. "Marcosian Atrocities: Historical Revisionism and the Legal Constraints on Forgetting." Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the Law 19, no. 2 (December 18, 2018): 140–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718158-01902003.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The Philippines resoundingly cried ‘never again’ to the horrors of the Marcos dictatorship through the People Power revolution of 1986. Thirty years later, the Filipino people have come to realise that success is indeed fleeting. On 18 November 2016, the remains of Philippine dictator Ferdinand E. Marcos were buried in the Libingan ng mga Bayani—the Heroes’ Cemetery. While the Philippine Supreme Court insists that the hero’s burial conferred to the author of the nation’s darkest chapter is a political question, from established doctrines here and abroad, the authors seek to derive the political answer. This article will look at the legitimacy of memory laws within the Philippine Constitutional framework. Finding guidance from the Auschiwtz lie case of the German Constitutional Court, the article seeks to combat historical revisionism and prohibit the Marcosian lie. Our research begins by looking at the resurgence of authoritarianism as seen through the populist presidency of Rodrigo Roa Duterte. We will then proceed to address the threshold issue of state-sanctioned narratives. Recognising that the duty to establish the truth involves the power to determine the narrative, the authors will reconcile the conflicting demands of the freedom of thought and the right to the truth. We will then proceed by utilising the fact-opinion distinction to demonstrate how the Marcosian lie may be the valid subject of regulation. The last phase of the research looks into the approaches adopted by the United Nations (un) Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights in dealing with negationism and historical revisionism.
4
Kalman, Laura. "In Defense of Progressive Legal Historiography." Law and History Review 36, no. 4 (November 2018): 1021–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0738248018000421.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This article surveys the debate between “progressives” and “revisionists” about the Constitution and constitutional interpretation during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Contemporary revisionist scholarship assumes that its victory over progressive scholarship is complete. The article suggests otherwise. First, it summarizes the revisionists’ achievements. Second, in an attempt to improve the quality of the debate, it maintains that “revisionist” and “progressive” legal historians undermine their cases by using words like “progressive,” “Gilded Age,” and “Jacksonian,” and that “revisionist” is not an enlightening term, either. Third, it contends that revisionists have made straw men out of the progressives, whose diversity and contributions they ignore, and that they have shown a lack of empathy for the circumstances facing the progressives. At considerable risk, progressives called attention to the relevance of political calculation, economic self-interest, and biography to understanding the Constitution, constitutional interpretation, and judicial power. The article also observes that revisionists have not yet won the day and that there are still “progressive” holdouts in the legal academy and history departments. Finally, it argues that like the work of “revisionists,” the scholarship of the “progressives”—particularly if we rechristen both—still has something to teach us and that it is time to abandon the familiar dialectic of thesis and antithesis and turn to synthesis.
5
Tafani, Ismail, and Renata Tokrri. "Some Reflections on the Constitutional Review in Albania in a Comparison Key." Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 12, no. 2 (March 7, 2021): 22. http://dx.doi.org/10.36941/mjss-2021-0009.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In this study we will try to analyze the foundations of the Constitution as a pillar and as a guarantee for its solidity. The study will also address the need for revision of the constitution as a fundamental element of its existence and continuity. Particular emphasis will be given to the comparison of the constitutions of the most important countries in the world as regards the procedures and limits to the constitutional revision. In this sense, the constitutions of some Balkan Peninsula countries will be analyzed to draw a comparison and analyze the Albanian Constitution as regards the procedure for its revision. The study intends to analyze the procedures for the revision of the Constitution as well as the explicit and implicit limits to these revisions. In the Constitutional revision in Albania in 2016, the role of the Constitutional Court on the control of the constitutional legitimacy of constitutional revision laws was clarified. Formal constitutionality is usually emphasized since the Albanian constitutional reform underlined that the Constitutional Court in Albania could express itself on the constitutionality of the Constitutional revision law only from a formal point of view.
Received: 2 January 2021 / Accepted: 27 February 2021 / Published: 7 March 2021
6
Shakti, Airlangga Gama, Maharani Wicahyaning Tyas, and M. Lutfi Rizal Farid. "The Integration of Judicial Review in Indonesia." Syiah Kuala Law Journal 6, no. 3 (February 7, 2023): 212–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.24815/sklj.v6i3.26940.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The judicial review is the essence of constitutional justice. At this time, Indonesia has adopted a dualism system in judicial review, which creates problems. This study aims to analyze the current judicial review system and examine the integration of judicial review by the Constitutional Court as ius constituendum. In reviewing the legal problems in this research, the Constitutional Court used the juridical-normative method. Furthermore, this research also uses a regulatory approach and a comparative study in Austria and Germany. The results show that Articles 24A and 24C of the Indonesia Constitutionhave delegated the Supreme Court the right to judicial review of regulations under the law, while the Constitutional Court has judicial review against the Indonesia Constitution. This raises problems, from practice to the difficulty of guarding the hierarchy of norms from Regional Regulations to the Indonesia Constitution. Judicial review at the Supreme Court also still has problems, especially transparency and accountability, because they have a closed nature. If analyzed in Austria, the Constitutional Court has the authority to judicial review the constitutionality of laws and the legality of administrative regulations (policies). In Germany, the Federal Constitutional Court has the authority to judicial review the law against the constitution. Therefore, there is a need for an urgency to integrate the judicial review by the Constitutional Court through the Amendment to the Indonesia Constitutionand several revisions to the regulations.
7
Treanor, William. "The Case of the Dishonest Scrivener: Gouverneur Morris and the Creation of the Federalist Constitution." Michigan Law Review, no. 120.1 (2021): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.36644/mlr.120.1.case.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
At the end of the Constitutional Convention, the delegates appointed the Committee of Style and Arrangement to bring together the textual provisions that the Convention had previously agreed to and to prepare a final constitution. Pennsylvania delegate Gouverneur Morris drafted the document for the Committee, and, with few revisions and little debate, the Convention adopted Morris’s draft. For more than two hundred years, questions have been raised as to whether Morris covertly altered the text in order to advance his constitutional vision, but modern legal scholars and historians studying the Convention have either ignored the issue or concluded that Morris was an honest scrivener. No prior article has systematically compared the Committee’s draft to the previously adopted resolutions or discussed the implications of those changes for constitutional law. This Article undertakes that comparison. It shows that Morris made fifteen significant changes to the Constitution and that many of the Constitution’s central elements were wholly or in critical part Morris’s work. Morris’s changes strengthened the national executive and judiciary, provided the textual basis for judicial review, increased presidential accountability through an expansive conception of impeachment, protected private property, mandated that the census report reflect “actual enumeration,” removed the constitutional text suggesting that slavery was just, and fought slavery’s spread. This Article also shows that Morris created the basis for the Federalist reading of the Constitution. Federalists—notably including fellow Committee member Alexander Hamilton—repeatedly drew on language crafted by Morris as they fought for their vision of the Constitution. Because the changes Morris made to the Convention’s agreed language were subtle, both Republicans and Federalists were able to appeal to text in the great constitutional battles of the early republic. Modern originalists claim that the Republican reading reflects the original understanding of the Constitution, but this Article argues that the largely dismissed Federalist reading explains words, phrases, and punctuation that the Republican reading ignores or renders unintelligible. By contrast, the Federalist reading of the Preamble (which they saw as a grant of substantive power), the Article I and Article II Vesting Clauses (which were contrasted to argue for expansive executive power), the Article III Vesting Clause (which they read to mandate the creation of lower federal courts), the Contracts Clause (which they read to cover public as well as private contracts), the Impeachment Clause (which they read to cover both nonofficial and official acts), and the “law of the land” provision (which they construed as a basis for judicial review) gives effect to Morris’s—and the Constitution’s—words.
8
Bix, Herbert P. "Whither Japan? Seven Decades After Defeat." Monthly Review 67, no. 6 (November 2, 2015): 19. http://dx.doi.org/10.14452/mr-067-06-2015-10_2.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The hard-won lessons of Japan's wartime defeat are enshrined in its National Constitution and Article 9 in particular.… For the past seventy years, Article 9 remained a fundamental principle of Japanese diplomacy, undergirded by memories of the Asia-Pacific War and the U.S. occupation, buttressed by important revisionist histories of Japanese imperialism. A politically recovered, economically restored Japanese populace still appreciates the Constitution and the relevance of Article 9. But conservative politicians who never believed in the Constitution's ideals repeatedly challenged and worked around Article 9 despite the majority's support for it.… Today, once again, Article 9 stands in danger of abandonment by interpretation rather than revision by constitutional processes.<p class="mrlink"><p class="mrpurchaselink"><a href="http://monthlyreview.org/index/volume-67-number-6" title="Vol. 67, No. 6: November 2015" target="_self">Click here to purchase a PDF version of this article at the <em>Monthly Review</em> website.</a></p>
9
Li, Yueying. "Research on the Current Status of the Revision of Japanese Constitution Article 9." Lecture Notes in Education Psychology and Public Media 8, no. 1 (September 14, 2023): 170–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.54254/2753-7048/8/20230091.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
A constitution sets out the most fundamental rules of a country, and the rule of law warrants the country to act in accordance with its constitutional laws. Because of the supreme status of the constitution, complicated procedures are commonly required for constitutional revision. A constitution is rarely revised unless vital; however, persistent appeals for constitutional revision in Japan have arisen since the last century. Debates revolve mainly around Article 9, also known as the "peace clause", of which Japan claims to renounce war and war potentials for international peace. Supporters contend Article 9 allows Japan to concentrate on economic development, and prevents the militarist resurgence that had victimized countless people both inside and outside Japan in World War II. Yet, dissenters tend to deem that Article 9 could hinder Japans rights to self-defense. Despite decades of efforts made by constitutional revisionists, the Japanese constitution remains unchanged since its promulgation. Therefore, a need arose for this paper to investigate the peace clause to find out why its revision has been tremendously difficult. By reviewing the interpretations and enforcement of Article 9 through secondary sources, this paper also suggests that Article 9 should indeed be revised.
10
Tsebelis, George. "Compromesso astorico: the role of the Senate after the Italian constitutional reform." Italian Political Science Review/Rivista Italiana di Scienza Politica 47, no. 1 (September 13, 2016): 87–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ipo.2016.21.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The article examines the content of the constitutional amendments with respect to the Senate. While symmetric bicameralism would be abolished with respect to policymaking, it would be preserved and even exacerbated with respect to constitutional revisions. The consequences of the first would be a reduction of the number of institutional veto players, which would lead to the facilitation of policy change, and an increase in the power of the government (who is the agenda setter). The content of the new policies remains unknown, as are the economic consequences of the proposed changes. Constitutional revisions would become more difficult, because the ideological distance between the Chamber of Deputies and Senate would be likely to increase (because of the mode of selection of Senators), while article 138, which specifies the requirements for amendment to the constitution, would remain the same. As a result, the role of the Italian Constitutional Court would also likely increase.
11
Bernard-Maugiron, Nathalie. "The 2007 Constitutional Amendments in Egypt, and Their Implications on the Balance of Power." Arab Law Quarterly 22, no. 4 (2008): 397–417. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157302508x374429.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Though its constitution had already been amended in 2005, Egypt went through a new constitutional revision in 2007. The amendments were officially justified by the need to modernize the constitution, and to reestablish a balance between the state powers. Through an analysis of the request presented by President Mubarak, and of the text of the amendments, of the counter proposals presented by opposition and civil society groups, of articles published in governmental and independent newspapers, this article will examine the content of the constitutional amendments of 2005 and 2007. If some revisions, aiming at diminishing the presidential nature of the regime, and increasing its parliamentary dimension, were generally well received, other amendments were often perceived as reinforcing the authoritarian character of the regime.
12
Diamant, Neil J. "WHAT THE (EXPLETIVE) IS A “CONSTITUTION”?! ORDINARY CADRES CONFRONT THE 1954 PRC DRAFT CONSTITUTION." Journal of Chinese History 2, no. 1 (September 12, 2017): 169–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/jch.2017.28.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractFollowing the history of western constitutional history, studies of Chinese constitutionalism have tended to focus on its intellectual origins, or, more commonly these days, its failure to restrain official behavior. Drawing upon new archival materials, this article takes a different tack. I zero in on a critical period of constitutional gestation, when officials read the 1954 constitution in draft form, posed questions about its text and suggested revisions. How did officials react when told that citizens, many of whom were recently persecuted, now enjoy “freedom of assembly”? These materials allow us to see “the state” in real time: How did officials understand core legal concepts such as “right,” “constitution” and “citizen” as well as their role in the new polity? In many respects, the discussion surrounding the draft constitution turned out to be a venue for officials to talk about the meaning of the revolution they had just experienced.
13
Kravets, I. A. "Communicative Constitutionalism, Constitutional Involvement and Citizenship in the Public Legal Space of Algorithmic and Information Society." Lex Russica 76, no. 11 (November 24, 2023): 41–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.17803/1729-5920.2023.204.11.041-056.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The paper dwells on theoretical foundations and methodological significance of communicative constitutionalism, provides an academic basis for constitutional communication in the public legal space, shows the problems of constitutional law nature arising in the information society. Communicative constitutionalism and digital citizenship are considered as hybrid institutions in the field of public law and information space. The author draws attention to the nature and significance of the institute of public participation or the institute of public participation in the public law area, various forms of its manifestation, notes the process of institutionalization of constitutional law as the law of society and public interests based on the research of domestic and foreign scholars The paper explains the public law nature of communicative constitutionalism, the complex nature and transformation of citizenship as a public law and as an information-digital entity. As a conclusion, it is noted that there is a fragmentation and dispersion of legal regulation and institutional design of institutions of public initiatives, public discussions and the identification of public opinion concerning publicly significant issues, draft regulatory legal acts, and constitutional amendments. There is no institution of scientific expertise guaranteed by constitutional legislation along with public discussion.In the order of legal scientific initiatives the author proposes to: 1) incorporate into the legislation the principle of scientific federalism and public participation in the development of draft amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the draft of a new Constitution; 2) consolidate at the legislative or constitutional law level the obligation of subjects of the initiative to revise the Constitution and constitutional amendments to send draft amendments submitted to the State Duma, to the leading universities of the country, research institutes of the Russian Academy of Sciences in order to conduct discussions and adopt conclusions; 3) create legislative guarantees to attract citizens through Internet technologies to discuss the content of amendments to the Constitution, the draft of a new Constitution, including the right to propose revisions of certain norms
14
Glass, Maeve Herbert. "Bringing Back the States: A Congressional Perspective on the Fall of Slavery in America." Law & Social Inquiry 39, no. 04 (2014): 1028–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12111.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In the aftermath of America's Civil War, national lawmakers who chronicled the fall of slavery described the North as a terrain of states whose representatives assembled in Congress, as evidenced in Henry Wilson's The Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America (1872–77) and Alexander Stephens's A Constitutional View of the Late War Between the States (1868–70). Beginning in the early 1900s, scholars who helped establish the field of American constitutional history redescribed the national government as the voice of the Northern people and the foe of the states, as evidenced in Henry Wilson's The Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America (1872–1877) and Alexander Stephens's A Constitutional View of the Late War Between the States (1868–1870), a first generation of scholars writing during the Progressive Era redescribed the national government as the voice of the Northern people and the foe of the states, as evidenced in William A. Dunning's Essays on the Civil War and Reconstruction (1898), John W. Burgess's The Civil War and the Constitution (1901–1906), and James G. Randall's Constitutional Problems Under Lincoln (1926). Although a second generation of scholars uncovered traces of the lawmakers' perspective of states, new efforts in the wake of the civil rights movement to understand the internal workings of political parties and the contributions of ordinary Americans kept the study of national lawmakers and their states on the margins of inquiry, as evidenced in leading revisionist histories of Reconstruction, including Harold Hyman's A More Perfect Union: The Impact of the Civil War and Reconstruction on the Constitution (1973), Michael Les Benedict's A Compromise of Principle: Congressional Republicans and Reconstruction, 1863–1869 (1974a), and Eric Foner's Reconstruction: An Unfinished Revolution (1988). Today, the terrain of Northern states remains in the backdrop, as illustrated in recent studies featuring the wartime national government, including James Oakes's Freedom National: The Destruction of Slavery in the United States, 1861–1865 (2012) and Mark E. Neely, Jr.'s Lincoln and the Triumph of the Nation: Constitutional Conflict in the American Civil War (2011), as well as studies of the mechanisms of constitutional change during Reconstruction, including relevant sections of Bruce Ackerman's We the People II: Transformations (1998) and Akhil Reed Amar's America's Constitution: A Biography (2005). This review essay argues that incorporating the states back into this century‐old framework will open new lines of inquiry and provide a more complete account of federalism's role in the fall of slavery. In particular, a return to the archives suggests that in the uncertain context of mid‐nineteenth‐century America, slavery's leading opponents in Congress saw the Constitution's federal logic not simply as an obstacle, but as a crucial tool with which to mobilize collective action and accommodate wartime opposition at a time when no one could say for sure what would remain of the United States.
15
NIELSON, DANIEL L., and MATTHEW SOBERG SHUGART. "Constitutional Change in Colombia." Comparative Political Studies 32, no. 3 (May 1999): 313–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010414099032003002.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
By the late 1980s the Colombian constitution had come under severe pressure for reform as the population shifted markedly from a rural to an urban majority. The president had repeatedly tried to provide policy to court the median Colombian voter, who was urban. The congress was strongly tied to rural interests. Congress consistently thwarted presidential efforts at policy reform. Different presidents again and again proposed constitutional reform as a way of achieving eventual policy aims, only to have the proposed reforms soundly rejected in the legislature. The Colombian congress solely possessed the authority to make constitutional revisions. This article tells the story of how this institutional impasse was overcome. In the wake of severe social strife and conflict a national referendum on constitutional reform was passed by popular vote and upheld by judicial action. This article argues that such constitutional conflict might only be overcome through extraconstitutional—although still democratic—means.
16
Myers, J. A. "State Constitution Revision: An Exercise in Federalism and Sovereignty." Political Science Teacher 1, no. 4 (1988): 9–10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0896082800000374.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Experience with the concepts of federalism and sovereignty is usually limited to readings and lectures, especially in a class of undergraduates. Since these two concepts are the foundation of American governmental structure on all levels, I want to ensure that the students grasp them. I feel that students have a better grasp of information and its application when they can actually use the information themselves. I have developed the following exercise to explore federalism and sovereignty issues: posing a question concerning a state's revision of its constitution to the students as if they were on the state's constitution revision commission. The lively debates and discussions that ensue cover not only the main issues of sovereignty and federalism but encompass the use (and misuse) of executive power, legislative oversight, and commissions—all concepts that are critical to the study of American national, state and local government.Towards the end of a class focusing on constitutions (and after a class covering the basics of federalism), the stage is set by talking about state constitution revisions and the trend toward simpler “plain English” state constitutions. (Note: This can be adapted for county/city/town charter revisions also.) The class is told that the instructor is the governor of the State of Confusion, and they have been gathered to form the State of Confusion's Constitution Revision Commission. The first section the commission will address at the next meeting is the following:
17
Munro, Kenneth. "The Constitution Act, 1982 and the Crown: Twenty-Five Years Later." Constitutional Forum / Forum constitutionnel 17, no. 1, 2 & 3 (July 11, 2011): 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.21991/c9dt1b.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In a splendid ceremony on Parliament Hill on 17 April 1982, Her Majesty proclaimed the Constitution Act, 1982.1 When the Prime Min- ister and premiers had met in November 1981 to develop procedures for patriating and amend- ing our Constitution, they failed to propose any revisions with respect to the monarchy, except for section 41(a) of the Constitution Act, 1982. Under this section, the unanimous agreement of the Governor General, Senate, House of Commons, and the legislative assembly of each province is required to amend the Constitution in relation to “the office of the Queen, the Gov- ernor General and the Lieutenant Governor of a province.”2 In effect, by entrenching the monar- chy in the Constitution, our leaders determined that Canada would remain a constitutional monarchy in perpetuity. The twenty-fifth anni- versary of the proclamation of the Constitution Act, 1982 provides an appropriate occasion to remind ourselves of the nature of our Canadian Crown and to ask whether this institution can evolve, or has evolved, to meet the needs of Ca- nadians.
18
Bokszczanin, Izolda. "Reforma konstytucyjna z 2020 roku redukująca liczbę parlamentarzystów w Republice Włoskiej – w kierunku racjonalizacji systemu parlamentarnego?" Studia Politologiczne, no. 3/2023(69) (July 10, 2023): 42–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.33896/spolit.2023.69.3.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The article aims to analize the nature and systemic implications of the constitutional reform carried out in the Italian Republic in 2020, which reduced the number of members of the chambers of parliament. It was the first revision of the Italian constitution since 2001 that was approved in a nationwide referendum, which was the condition for the entry into force of the amendment (two other constitutional revisions: from 2005 and 2016, were rejected in a referendum vote). The concept of rationalization of parliamentarism has been adopted as the leading theoretical reference in this text. The initial research question focused on to what extend the postulate of rationalization of the Italian parliamentarism was achieved by the way of undertaken initiatives to revise the constitutional order. The analyzes carried out allowed to formulate a proposal to explain the potential of rationalization of parliamentarism within the so-called partial reform in the face of failures in implementing comprehensive reforms.
19
Borșa, Gheorghe. "THE FUNDAMENTAL LAW – A REVIEW?" AGORA INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF JURIDICAL SCIENCES 16, no. 2 (December 30, 2022): 1–3. http://dx.doi.org/10.15837/aijjs.v16i2.5127.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Constitutional revisions, in the majority of them, are determined by internal considerations, considerations that can be of a political or legal nature, revisions through which political commitments are introduced into the constitutional texts through cosmetic changes, thus creating the premises for constitutional and legislative reform.
20
Gerkrath, Jörg. "Some Remarks on the Pending Constitutional Change in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg." European Public Law 19, Issue 3 (June 1, 2013): 449–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/euro2013028.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In the history of constitutional changes in Europe, the making of a new constitution is often linked to violent incidents like a revolution, a coup d'état or a war. That is why the change of the constitution was mostly preceded by a change of the holder of the constituent power. The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, however, is currently engaged in a process of constitution making in compliance with the revision procedure established by the existent document. The Constitution of the Grand Duchy, one of the oldest constitutional documents in Europe still in force, is undergoing a far-reaching revision aiming at a general overhaul.1 According to the parliamentary committee in charge, this revision shall finally give birth to a 'new' constitution, meaning that a modified and updated edition of the constitution shall be published in the national official journal (Mémorial). The revised text will then be considered as the Constitution of 2013 or, more likely, of 2014. The Constitution of 1868 is to be repealed. After the previous charters from 1841, 1848 and 1856 and the present text from 1868, it would thus become the fifth constitution of the Grand Duchy. As constitutional history also shows, this would not be the first time that Luxembourg adopts a new constitution following the formal amendment procedure foreseen by the previous document.2 Local politicians and lawyers seem to consider that the academic distinction between 'constitution making' by the will of an original pouvoir constituant and 'constitutional revision' through a parliamentary procedure prescribed by the constitution itself represents rather a gradual difference than a fundamental one. A number of good reasons convinced the Committee on Institutions and Constitutional Affairs of the Chamber of Deputies to introduce on 21 April 2009 a revision proposal aiming to modify and re-arrange the out-dated Constitution of 1868. While several initiatives for a general revision of the Constitution have been undertaken since the 1970s, none has been successful. Only fractional revisions were adopted in a century and a half. Between 1919 and 2009, no less than thirty-four amendments are listed, the last dating from 12 March 2009. Having occurred at different times and on various aspects, they have certainly undermined the coherence of the initial text. Nonetheless, the Constitution still includes a majority of provisions dating back to its origins. The main reasons put forward by the drafters of the revision proposal are: first, to modernize a terminology somewhat out-dated; second, to adapt the legal text to the political reality by re-writing the constitution and make it coincide with the 'living constitution' as reflected in the functioning of institutions, and third, to incorporate into the written constitution provisions relating to succession to the throne currently contained in a legal document of uncertain value, namely the Family Compact of the House of Nassau (Nassauischer Erbfolgeverein) of 1783. Almost four years after its launch, this amendment procedure, still far from being accomplished, is now, in February 2013, in a sufficiently advanced stage to allow some general commentaries. Given the limited format of this country report, the following remarks will focus on a brief presentation of the applicable revision procedure and a provisional scrutiny of some of the most substantial amendments under discussion.
21
BALDWIN, GEOFF. "REVISIONISM AND THE ANCIENT HISTORICISM." Historical Journal 40, no. 2 (June 1997): 519–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0018246x97007279.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Absolute monarchy and the Stuart constitution. By Glenn Burgess. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1996. Pp. ix+229. £25.00.Henry Parker and the English civil war. By Michael Mendle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Pp. xix+204. £35.00.Classical humanism and English political thought, 1550–1640. By Markku Peltonen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Pp. xii+356. £35.00.Republicanism, liberty, and commercial society, 1649–1776. Ed. David Wootton. Stanford, Ca.: Stanford University Press, 1995. Pp. ix+497. £40.00.
22
Moon, Jae-Tae. "A study on the direction of legislation to guarantee property rights." European Constitutional Law Association 41 (April 30, 2023): 509–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.21592/eucj.2023.41.509.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Recently, the problem of soaring real estate prices in Korea has emerged as a public concern. As a result, the National Assembly revised the law related to real estate to pursue a change in the existing economic order. The constitution of our country adopts democracy and is based on the principles of national sovereignty and capitalism. These constitutional principles apply to all sectors of the state. The constitution stipulates that 'the economic order of Korea is based on respecting the economic freedom and creativity of individuals and companies.' In other words, the constitution explicitly states that it is based on the private property system and private autonomy. The Constitution and Civil Law also have specific rules for guaranteeing property rights. There are also restrictions on people's property rights and regulations on public use. However, if the people are divided due to the legislative action of the National Assembly, great confusion can occur nationally. Currently, Korea is conducting a post-mortem review of whether the legislation of the National Assembly is unconstitutional. Grana has not introduced a pre-screening system. Therefore, it is necessary to fully review the controversial revisions of the law. To this end, I would like to examine the legislative process and interpretation of the restrictions on property rights in Germany and France. In addition, it reviews decisions on property rights of the Constitutional Court of Korea. Through this, it is necessary to derive a clear criterion for infringement of property rights against laws related to property rights restrictions.
23
Cornell, Saul. "Moving Beyond the Canon of Traditional Constitutional History: Anti-Federalists, the Bill of Rights, and the Promise of Post-Modern Historiography." Law and History Review 12, no. 1 (1994): 1–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0738248000011238.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Few aspects of post-structuralist literary criticism have garnered as much attention and provoked as much controversy as the move to challenge the idea of a fixed literary canon of great texts. The implications of deconstructing the canon extend well beyond the study of fiction. All fields of scholarship have a canon of established texts, methodologies, and questions. Critiques of the literary canon resemble the challenge to conventional history posed by the new social history and its efforts to write a history from the bottom up that would supplant traditional historical scholarship. A similar revisionist effort is now only just beginning to emerge in constitutional historiography. Proponents of “a new constitutional history” are seeking to challenge the canon of traditional constitutional history. While this revisionist project has not been cast in post-structuralist terms, the perspective provided by recent critical theory can refine the practice of the new constitutional history.
24
Sanchis Vidal, Amalia, and María José Ramos Rovi. "AFRANCESADAS Y MAJAS: PRESENTES EN LA GUERRA E INVISIBLES EN LAS CORTES. ANÁLISIS FEMINISTA." RAUDEM. Revista de Estudios de las Mujeres 2 (May 22, 2017): 172. http://dx.doi.org/10.25115/raudem.v2i0.596.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Este artículo es un análisis revisionista del periodo que abarca la Guerra de la Independencia, el Estatuto de Bayona y la Constitución de 1812. Hacemos especial hincapié en la ausencia de las mujeres, por ello empleamos una epistemología feminista para analizar los textos jurídicos e históricos. También queremos hacer una puesta en valor de los recursos usados por las mujeres para dar a conocer su acervo cultural. Cuando les negaron la entrada a la Academia también dejaron fuera sus saberes.Palabras clave: Constitución de 1812, derechos, epistemología, género, mujeres. Abstract: This paper is a revisionist analysis of the period between The Independence War, the Bayonne Statute and the Constitution of 1812. We focus on the abscence of women and that is why we use a feminist epistemology to analyze the juridical and historic texts. We also want to highlight the resources used by women to demonstrate their cultural background. When they were not allowed to become members of the Academy/Academia, their knowledge was also expelled with them.Key words]: Spanish Constitution of 1812, rights, epistemology, gender, women.
25
Orr, D. Alan. "A Prospectus for a “New” Constitutional History of Early Modern England." Albion 36, no. 3 (2004): 430–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4054367.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The study of English constitutional history has fallen on hard times. Once an intellectually thriving field, constitutional history now conjures up visions of bad tweed and bow ties coupled with dryly-legalistic discussions of statutes, charters, parliamentary debates, Year Books, and legal reports. Indeed, whether Whig, Neo-Whig, Revisionist, or Post-Revisionist in orientation, constitutional history has traditionally concerned itself with the “activity of government”; it has emphasized the formal structures of government, their historical origins, their changing composition, their evolving roles, and functions. These formal structures, the Crown, Parliament, the Council, the established church, and the law courts, together constituted the sinews of government. Constitutional controversy arose when the respective roles and functions of these formal structures came into conflict. Accordingly, constitutional historians became experts on the anatomy and development of the particular organs of government and their changing roles yet they were often unable to see the broader conceptual forest in which they were standing. As a result, some critics have lampooned constitutional history and its leading proponents as lacking theoretical engagement and being overly preoccupied with the minutiae of government at the expense of conceptual sophistication and breadth of vision.
26
Higuchi, Yoichi. "The Constitution and the Emperor System: Is Revisionism Alive?" Law and Contemporary Problems 53, no. 1 (1990): 51. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1191825.
Повний текст джерела
27
Dobrynin, Nikolaj M. "The innovations of the Constitution of the Russian Federation: present and future. A reflection on faults… or results? (The end)." Gosudarstvo i pravo, no. 7 (2021): 72. http://dx.doi.org/10.31857/s102694520016183-2.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The paper is an analytical overview focused on the amendments, which were included to the Constitution of the Russian Federation in 2020, in order to estimate their meaning and probable effects from the perspectives of the Philosophy of Law and ontological grounds of the Russian model of constitutionalism, as well as from the point of presently formed and actual social and political practices. Relying upon the different views and public eventful circumstances, author makes the conclusion that all the needed improvements of the contemporary Russian constitutionalism cannot be reached merely by revising the 1993 Russian Constitution, whatever revisions could be. Contrarily, the process of formation of value-enriched fundamentals of social transactions and the constitutionality of socio-political sphere are to be founded on the ground of moral basics of the Russian people which are able to become a source of achieving of the social solidarity, revival of a trust between people and government, maintain a firm basis for a complete implementation of the constitutional provisions and serve as a starting point for the whole legal modernization of Russia.
28
Eddyono, Luthfi Widagdo. "Progresivitas Putusan Sengketa Kewenangan Lembaga Negara dan Pembaharuan Hukum Acara." Jurnal Konstitusi 16, no. 1 (April 1, 2019): 127. http://dx.doi.org/10.31078/jk1617.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Berdasarkan Pasal 24C ayat (1) UUD 1945, salah satu kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi adalah memutus sengketa kewenangan lembaga negara yang kewenangannya diberikan oleh UUD 1945. Untuk mengatur hal-hal lebih lanjut, dibentuklah Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Akan tetapi, undang-undang tersebut masih belum menjelaskan detail hukum acara kewenangan tersebut, sehingga Mahkamah Konstitusi diberikan kewenangan untuk mengatur hal-hal yang diperlukan bagi kelancaran pelaksanaan tugas dan wewenangnya. Karenanya Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 08/PMK/2006 tentang Pedoman Beracara dalam Sengketa Kewenangan Konstitusional Lembaga Negara bertanggal, 18 Juli 2006 dibuat oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi. Akan tetapi, Peraturan itu belum juga diubah sampai sekarang padahal berbagai putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi sedikit banyak telah menentukan beberapa hal yang terkait dengan hukum formal di Mahkamah Konstitusi. Bahkan setelah adanya Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi, Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi juga belum direvisi. Tulisan ini akan memfokuskan pada analisis terhadap hukum acara perkara sengketa kewenangan lembaga negara oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi pasca beberapa putusan yang telah dihasilkan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dan adanya Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi. Rekomendasi yang dihasilkan terkait dengan kebutuhan revisi hukum acara Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagaimana termaktub dalam Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi seperti perlunya diatur keberadaan pihak terkait karena sengketa tersebut pada dasarnya adalah perselisihan atau perbedaan pendapat yang berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan kewenangan antara dua atau lebih lembaga negara, sehingga sengketa kewenangan lembaga negara masih memungkinkan adanya pihak terkait.Based on Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, one of the authorities of the Constitutional Court is to decide on the authority dispute of state institutions whose authority is granted by the 1945 Constitution. To regulate further matters, Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court was established. However, the law still does not explain the details of the procedural law of the authority, so the Constitutional Court is given the power to regulate matters needed for the smooth implementation of its duties and authorities. Therefore the Constitutional Court Regulation Number 08/PMK/2006 concerning Procedure Guidelines in the Constitutional Institutional Authority Dispute dated July 18, 2006, was made by the Constitutional Court. However, the regulation has not been changed until now even though various Constitutional Court decisions have determined the number of things related to formal law in the Constitutional Court. Even after the Law Number 8 of 2011 concerning Amendments to Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court, the Constitutional Court Regulation has also not been revised. This paper will focus on the analysis of the procedural law on state authority dispute cases by the Constitutional Court after several decisions that have been produced by the Constitutional Court and the existence of Law Number 8 of 2011 concerning Amendments to Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court. There are recommendations that are generated related to the need for revisions to the Constitutional Court procedural law as set out in the Constitutional Court Regulations such as the need to regulate the existence of related parties because the dispute is basically a dispute or difference of opinion relating to the implementation of authority between two or more state institutions.
29
Magliocca, Gerard N. "A Faction of One: Revisiting Madison's Notes on the Constitutional Convention." Law & Social Inquiry 43, no. 01 (2018): 267–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/lsi.12296.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This essay on Madison's Hand: Revising the Constitutional Convention, Mary Bilder's revisionist account (2016) of James Madison's Notes on the Constitutional Convention argues that her central thesis, which is that Madison substantially revised the Notes long after the Convention adjourned, is groundbreaking but will have no effect on constitutional law. Madison's Hand is groundbreaking because the book yields many powerful insights into the deliberations of the Convention and into the evolution of Madison's thought. Nevertheless, constitutional practice in the Supreme Court and among elite lawyers is so divorced from the Notes that even a dramatic shift in their interpretation will not disturb the evolution of judicial doctrine applying the text written in 1787.
30
Millns, Susan. "The Treaty of Amsterdam and Constitutional Revisions in France." European Public Law 5, Issue 1 (March 1, 1999): 61–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/euro1999007.
Повний текст джерела
31
Young, Michael B. "Charles I and the Erosion of Trust, 1625–1628." Albion 22, no. 2 (1990): 217–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/4049598.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In contrast to their predecessors, who emphasized constitutional conflict and opposition in the parliaments of early Stuart England, revisionists emphasized harmony and cooperation. There was a problem with this new, anti-Whig orthodoxy from the outset, however, and that was the problem of trust. Defying the revisionist model of harmonious relations between Crown and Parliament, the M.P.s of early Stuart England perversely refused to trust James I and Charles I. Revisionists adopted two strategies to deal with this problem of trust. Conrad Russell exemplified the one strategy: he acknowledged the existence of distrust but treated it as a deep mystery requiring ingenious explanations. Surveying the reign of James I, Russell discovered “profound distrust, but it is hard to show how this distrust was implanted.” Perplexed by this enigma, Russell observed, “One of the most crucial, and one of the most difficult, questions of the early Stuart period is why this distrust developed.” For Russell, then, it was not natural for M.P.s to distrust the king. It was, instead, an unnatural attitude that had to be “implanted” or “developed.” In time, of course, Russell solved the mystery of distrust by providing a series of explanations: distrust resulted from the pressures of war, friction between the localities and the center, the functional breakdown of an inadequately financed government, court factionalism, and the growth of Arminianism. In Russell's view, the underlying problems that gave rise to distrust had more to do with circumstances and structures than with people, least of all James I and Charles I. A second strategy for dealing with the problem of trust is best exemplified by Kevin Sharpe: he solves the problem neatly by denying its existence. Steadfastly adhering to the revisionist model of harmony and cooperation, Sharpe claims that M.P.s did in fact behave the way that model predicts they should have. “In the early Stuart period,” writes Sharpe, “compromises between king and parliaments…were common because fundamental beliefs were shared and there was an atmosphere of trust.” Sharpe admits that there was an “erosion of trust” in the latter part of Charles's reign. “But,” he insists, “there is little evidence that it unfolds in the parliaments of early Stuart England.”
32
Sato, Isao. "Comment: Revisionism during the Forty Years of the Constitution of Japan." Law and Contemporary Problems 53, no. 1 (1990): 97. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1191829.
Повний текст джерела
33
Michelman, Frank I. "Israel’s “Constitutional Revolution”: A Thought from Political Liberalism." Theoretical Inquiries in Law 19, no. 2 (August 14, 2018): 745–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/til-2018-0034.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract In his book The Purse and the Sword: The Trials of Israel’s Legal Revolution, Daniel Friedmann brings under critical inspection what he names as a legal revolution in Israel. Friedmann gives us, under that name, an account of a shift of certain major and sensitive state powers from elected leaders and legislators to politically insulated officials and judges. The Supreme Court’s construction of two Basic Law enactments of the twelfth Knesset into a justiciable, substantive “formal constitution” for Israel figures in Friedmann’s book as one component of the revolution, along with other judicial developments, including purposive interpretation of constitutional and other laws, an intensified form of common-law review of administrative actions for unreasonableness, and expansionary revisions to standing and justiciability. In all these developments, Aharon Barak took a leading part as judge and as scholar. I here consider to what extent these developments may be understood as responsive to promptings from a “political-liberal” conception of a justificational burden and need for substantive constitutional law. I reflect here on the possible pull of this conception in a political-cultural setting of a persisting widespread attachment to an idea of Israel as a member of the family of liberal constitutional states, and hence on Barak’s understanding of the role and responsibility of the Supreme Court. I speculate briefly about how far that pull may extend also to Professor Friedmann in his role of critic of the judicial handiwork of Barak and the Court on which he served.
34
Lubis, Luken ferisman, Eddy Asnawi, and Bagio Kadaryanto. "Penetapan Ambang Batas Calon Presiden dan Wakil Presiden Berdasarkan UU No. 23 Tahun 2003 dan UU No. 7 Tahun 2017." DOKTRINA: JOURNAL OF LAW 6, no. 1 (April 30, 2023): 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.31289/doktrina.v6i1.6701.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The purpose of this study is how the threshold for the nomination of president and vice president is based UU No. 23 Year 2003 and UU No. 7 Year 2017 and how ideally the threshold for presidential and vice presidential candidates is determined based on UU No. 23 Year 2003 and UU No. 7 Year 2017. This type of research is normative legal research by analyzing cases that conflict with the law using qualitative methods to draw deductive conclusions. The provisions for setting thresholds in presidential elections constitutionally violate the constitutional rights of citizens based on the provisions of Article 6A paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution which states "pairs of presidential and vice-presidential candidates are proposed by political parties or a coalition of political parties participating in general elections prior to the holding of general elections. This provision provides space for political parties to nominate presidential and vice presidential candidates. However, in Article 222 UU No.7 Year 2017 concerning General Elections, it provides a limit of 20% of the number of seats in the DPR or 25% of valid votes nationally in the previous DPR member elections. In a presidential system, the imposition of a threshold is irrelevant because theoretically the separation of powers does not recognize the president's accountability to the parliament, thus the threshold is not appropriate if the votes used are from the DPR election. Setting the threshold for presidential and vice-presidential candidates is simply reduced to 5% of seats in the DPR and 10% of valid votes from the previous general election or the article on setting the threshold for presidential and vice-presidential candidates is simply abolished through revisions to the general election law.
35
Harašta, Jakub. "Michal Kolmaš: National Identity and Japanese Revisionism." Mezinárodní vztahy 56, no. 2 (June 1, 2021): 109–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.32422/mv-cjir.1777.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Over the course of the twentieth century, Japan has experienced a radical shift in its self-perception. After World War II, Japan embraced a peaceful and anti-militarist identity, which was based on its war-prohibiting Constitution and the foreign policy of the Yoshida doctrine. For most of the twentieth century, this identity was unusually stable. In the last couple of decades, however, Japan’s self-perception and foreign policy seem to have changed. Tokyo has conducted a number of foreign policy actions as well as symbolic internal gestures that would have been unthinkable a few decades ago and that symbolize a new and more confident Japan. Japanese politicians – including Prime Minister Abe Shinzō – have adopted a new discourse depicting pacifism as a hindrance, rather than asset, to Japan’s foreign policy. Does that mean that “Japan is back”? In order to better understand the dynamics of contemporary Japan, Kolmaš joins up the dots between national identity theory and Japanese revisionism. The book shows that while political elites and a portion of the Japanese public call for re-articulation of Japan’s peaceful identity, there are still societal and institutional forces that prevent this change from entirely materializing.
36
Hedieloum, Kodio Ahmed. "Comparative Study on the Procedures, Limits, and Control of Constitutional Revisions." Beijing Law Review 10, no. 03 (2019): 579–615. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/blr.2019.103034.
Повний текст джерела
37
Noble, Gregory W. "Opportunity Lost: Partisan Incentives and the 1997 Constitutional Revisions in Taiwan." China Journal 41 (January 1999): 89–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2667588.
Повний текст джерела
38
Farr, James. ""Absolute Power and Authority"." Locke Studies 20 (October 29, 2020): 1–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/ls.2020.10310.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This essay offers a detailed textual study of the Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina in light of its history of extensive revisions. In due course, it considers Locke’s considerable secretarial presence and, more guardedly, his authorial presence in these revisions. The Fundamental Constitutions imagined an aristocratic republic in a colonial setting; and its fundamental ideology was one of proprietary absolutism. Its ever-changing articles on absolute power, slavery, and religion are of greatest interest. Important in themselves, they also invite inquiry into their points of contact with Locke’s political theory.
39
Andrews, Catherine. "Jaime E. Rodríguez O. and the Constitution of Cádiz in Contemporary Historiography." Mexican Studies/Estudios Mexicanos 39, no. 3 (2023): 376–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/msem.2023.39.3.376.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This article analyzes historiographical discussions relating to the reception and interpretation of the 1812 Spanish Constitution—the Constitution of Cádiz—in Spanish America, with a particular focus on the debates around the influence of Cádiz in Mexico after 1821. It argues that Jaime E. Rodríguez O. formed part of revisionist group of scholars who challenged early nationalist narratives surrounding independence and political ideologies in Mexico and Spanish America. This revisionist history argued that liberalism grew domestically in this region as part of the Spanish Enlightenment and exhibited more democratic sensibilities than its US or European counterparts. The article shows how this interpretation has been questioned by Latin American and postcolonial scholars in recent decades, who insist that nineteenth-century liberalism was undemocratic and exclusionary in all of its forms. It concludes by discussing the possible new paths that historiography could adopt in its study of political ideas in nineteenth-century Mexico.
40
Hamudy, Moh Ilham A., and M. Saidi Rifki. "Strengthening the Multi-Party Presidential Government in Indonesia." Politik Indonesia: Indonesian Political Science Review 4, no. 2 (July 25, 2019): 208–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.15294/ipsr.v4i2.18447.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The Multi-Party Presidential Government in Indonesia has reached a critical point. The 2.5 percent parliamentary threshold rule in the 2009 Election was incapable to address the issue. The parliamentary threshold was raised to 3.5 percent in 2014, in the hope to reduce the number of party joining the election, but it failed to do so. There were 9 national parties participating in the 2009 election, and it will be increased to 16 in the 2019 election. Theoretically, the combination of multi-party parliament in a Presidential Government is rather strange. It is not surprising that the "conflict" between the president and parliament often occurs. There suppose to be a coalition supporting the government in parliament, but the coalition is not a firm one. The coalition did not have a significant influence in strengthening the presidential government. Therefore, this study intends to provide a complete picture of multi-party system practices while trying to provide solutions for strengthening the presidential government in Indonesia. To achieve this goal, this study uses the literature study method in collecting relevant information, using a qualitative approach. This approach is considered appropriate because multi-party phenomena and presidential systems are multidimensional. In contrast to previous research which was limited to the description and problems of multiparty systems, this research besides describing the system of government also provided moderate solutions that were considered to be in accordance with the Indonesian context. This study assumes that strengthening presidential systems can be done if the political parties are more modest. In addition, parliamentary support for the president must be optimized. The results of the study concluded that the strengthening of presidential systems must be carried out through the purification of the government system contained in the constitution, forming and strengthening the ranks of government coalitions in parliament, and carrying out a number of institutional engineering through various forms. These three things must be wrapped in a constitutional frame (amendments to the 1945 Constitution) and regulations (revisions to laws and government regulations). The amendments and revisions can be done through three corridors, namely the intra-parliamentary movement, the extra-parliamentary movement, and the referendum.
41
Lewans, Matthew. "Interpreting Dicey." University of Toronto Law Journal 73, no. 4 (October 1, 2023): 499–520. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/utlj-2023-0023.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Mark Walters’s book examines the intellectual development and legacy of Albert Venn Dicey, one of the most influential constitutional theorists of the twentieth century. By sifting through an impressive array of published and unpublished sources, Walters reconstructs Dicey’s characteristic legal turn of mind and invites readers to interpret it in the best possible light by highlighting implicit, but unarticulated, connections between his theory of constitutional law and the much older tradition of common law constitutionalism. The book deepens one’s understanding of the historical context that enveloped and informed Dicey’s distinct legal perspective and convincingly debunks the popular assumption that his influential constitutional theory repurposes Austinian conceptions of law and sovereignty. Furthermore, the book questions whether other aspects of Dicey’s constitutional theory – particularly, his provocative excursus on the relationship between the rule of law and droit administratif – should be reconsidered in light of subtle revisions in his later works. While Walters’s pluralistic interpretation of Dicey’s assessment of droit administratif is more tentative, it sheds an important new light on how his highly influential constitutional theory might be rehabilitated to enable contemporary public lawyers and theorists to grapple with otherwise intractable problems through the common law method of reasoning.
42
Siegel, Stephen A. "The Revision Thickens." Law and History Review 20, no. 3 (2002): 631–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1556321.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In the last third of the twentieth century, the Progressive historians' account of Gilded Age law was overthrown by three interrelated strands of revisionist scholarship. One strand, which originated in work by Alan Jones, Charles McCurdy, and Les Benedict, thoroughly revised our understanding of Gilded Age constitutional development. Another strand, led by Robert Gordon, Thomas Grey, and Morton Horwitz, reformed our view of Gilded Age private law. The final strand, first elaborated by Duncan Kennedy, explored the unity of Gilded Age public and private law.
43
Kirchner, Christian. "The unanimity rule revisited: the case of revisions of hybrid constitutions." Public Choice 152, no. 3-4 (July 25, 2012): 445–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11127-012-9997-x.
Повний текст джерела
44
Dörfler, Thomas, Katharina Holzinger, and Jan Biesenbender. "Constitutional Dynamics in the European Union: Success, Failure, and Stability of Institutional Treaty Revisions." International Journal of Public Administration 40, no. 14 (March 28, 2017): 1237–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2017.1295267.
Повний текст джерела
45
Sawyer, Logan Everett. "Method and Dialogue in History and Originalism." Law and History Review 37, no. 3 (July 12, 2019): 847–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0738248019000373.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
There is a sharp separation between the scholarly literature of originalists and professional historians. Originalists cite one another, but regularly ignore recent work by historians. Historians are generally happy to return the favor. Engagement between the two communities is too often limited to methodological disputes and amicus briefs. As a result, historical inquiry offers less to constitutional law than it might, and constitutional lawyers offer less to history than they could. Some of this separation is due to unavoidable methodological tension, but those tensions have not always frustrated productive dialogue. Originalism, in fact, emerged as an important theory of constitutional interpretation because of developments in professional historiography. Post-Revisionist approaches to the historiography of Reconstruction inspired and legitimated the book that set originalism on its current trajectory: Raoul Berger's Government by Judiciary. The revolution in the historiography of the founding embodied in Gordon Wood's Creation of the American Republic offered originalists other opportunities. It was not methodological disagreements but technological, institutional, and disciplinary developments since the 1980s that separated history and originalism. Those trends have mostly accelerated in the twenty-first century, but the role historians played in creating originalism suggests opportunities for productive dialogue still exist and should be pursued.
46
Wright, John SF. "The Nature of the Australian Constitution: The Limitations of the Institutional and Revisionist Approaches." Federal Law Review 28, no. 3 (September 2000): 345–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.22145/flr.28.3.1.
Повний текст джерела
47
Wright, John SF. "The Nature of the Australian Constitution: The Limitations of the Institutional and Revisionist Approaches." Federal Law Review 28, no. 3 (September 2000): 345–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0067205x0002800301.
Повний текст джерела
48
Nottage, Luke. "International Commercial Arbitration in Australia: Whats New and Whats Next?" Journal of International Arbitration 30, Issue 5 (October 1, 2013): 465–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.54648/joia2013031.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This article argues that not much has changed since Australia amended in 2010 its International Arbitration Act, incorporating most of the 2006 revisions to the UNCITRAL Model Law as well as other reforms aimed at positioning Australia as a plausible arbitral venue in the Asia-Pacific region. There is no evidence yet of a broader 'cultural reform' that would make international arbitration speedier and more cost-effective - as urged by Australia's then Attorney-General when introducing the 2010 amendments. In fact, the article first outlines one ongoing cross-border dispute that has engendered at least five sets of proceedings, including a (thankfully unsuccessful) constitutional challenge to the Model Law regime. It then compares case disposition statistics for other Federal Court cases decided three years before and after the amendments, finding only minor differences.1 The article suggests a range of further revisions needed for the Act that emerge from the dispute including the constitutional challenge, as well as other topics for reform including measures to encourage a more internationalist interpretation of instruments such as the Model Law. Continuous improvement and continuous vigilance are needed for Australia to keep developing distinctive expertise in this complex and evolving field of law and practice.
49
Wiebe, Todd J. "Book Review: Encyclopedia of Constitutional Amendments, Proposed Amendments, and Amending Issues, 1979–2015." Reference & User Services Quarterly 55, no. 3 (March 25, 2016): 249. http://dx.doi.org/10.5860/rusq.55n3.249b.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Amending (pun totally intended) such works of reference on a semi-regular basis is key to staying current. In this fourth edition author John R. Vile has again made the necessary revisions to reflect the enduring engagement and discourse pertaining to the practice of amending the US Constitution. It should be noted that if you are looking for a straight-forward, chronological overview of the amendments in their historical contexts, this would probably not be the go-to source.
50
MATSUI, Shigenori. "Fundamental Human Rights and ‘Traditional Japanese Values’: Constitutional Amendment and Vision of the Japanese Society." Asian Journal of Comparative Law 13, no. 1 (February 22, 2018): 59–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/asjcl.2017.25.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractEver since the Constitution of Japan was enacted in 1946, conservative Japanese people must have been unhappy with it. Their past attempts to enact a new constitution or to make radical revisions have been unsuccessful, but they might finally accomplish their goal under the current Abe Cabinet. Why are conservative people unhappy with the Constitution? It is because the Constitution prevents Japan from becoming a ‘normal state’, and it is deemed not in line with ‘traditional Japanese values’. The fundamental human rights provisions are their main target. Therefore, conservative people want to restore ‘traditional Japanese values’ by amending the bill of rights of the Constitution. This article will examine the reasons why conservative people are upset with the Constitution, how they would like to amend it, and whether their arguments are persuasive. It will conclude that their arguments, just like the ‘Asian values’ theory, are hardly justifiable and could completely undermine the foundation of individual rights protection.