Suchergebnisse

On 11 July 2013, a new draft law on the Constitutional Tribunal was submitted to the Parliament by the President of the Polish Republic. The first reading of the draft took place on 29 August 2013, then it was sent to further works in the parliamentary Committee on Justice and Human Rights and the parliamentary Legislative Committee. Keywords: Polish Constitution, parliamentary Committee on Justice and Human Right, parliamentary Legislative Committee

Published online: 28 February 2018 ; This paper discusses a decision of the Hungarian Constitutional Court issued in December 2016, in which the judges refer to the country's constitutional identity to justify the government's refusal to apply the EU'S refugee relocation scheme in Hungary. The paper concludes that this abuse of constitutional identity for merely nationalistic political purposes discredits every genuine and legitimate reference to national constitutional identity claims, and strengthens calls for an end to constitutional pluralism in the EU altogether.

From a legal-philosophical point of view, The Redress of Law presents a critical analysis of a number of related doctrinal fields: constitutional, labour and EU Law. Focusing on the organisation and protection of work, this book asks what it means to protect work as an essential aspect of human (individual and collective) flourishing. This is an ambitious and highly sophisticated intervention in contemporary academic and political debates around a set of critically important questions connected to processes of globalisation and market integration. The author redefines the nature of legal and political thought in an age in which market rationality has exceeded its classic domain and has come to pervade the organization of social and political life. This restatement of critical legal theory is intended to defend the concept of constitutionalism and suggest new ways to deploy the law strategically.

Introduction: International Law, National Revolutions and Constitutional Updates -- Backgrounds -- Classification and Visualization of a Multi-dimensional Illustration -- Classification and Indexation of Constitutions -- A Sample Evaluation and Future of the Research.

Law No. 30 of 2014 on Government Administration (Government Administration Law) has set the scope of discretion in Indonesian legal system. But the form of discretion is limited in scope government decision (KTUN) and factual actions of the government. The restriction implicates circulars or others policy rule is not a form of discretion. In addition, the provisions concerning the terms of use discretion, procedures and legal effect of discretion in the Government Administration Law are not applicable to the use of policy rule. In fact, the substance of discretion in policy rule (e.g. circulars and instructions) has the potential of conflicting laws and regulations and/or General Principles of Good Administration. The legal issues in this study are the constitutionality of the scope of discretion in Article 1 point 9 and Article 23 paragraph (1) of the Government Administration Law. This analysis showed that limits the scope of discretion in Government Administration Law contrary to formal elements, substantive, and control mechanisms within the rule of law. This analysis also suggests the expansion of the scope of discretion in the Government Administration Law and setting policy rules as the object of the petition for judicial review so that there is a control mechanism by trial to discretion in the form of policy rule.

The State of Hawaii has a unique land ownership problem directly affecting many of the state's homeowners: a handful of people own a large percentage of the land available for residential housing." Consequently, a significant proportion of homeowners rent, under long-term leases, the land on which their homes are built. In 1967 the Hawaii legislature took action to break up this concentration of ownership by enacting the Land Reform Act. The legislature declared that such ownership was a threat to the health, safety, and welfare of Hawaii's citizens because of its significant contribution to the spiraling inflation of land values. To alleviate the problem, the Act authorized a redistribution of the fees simple from the few landowner/lessors to the many homeowner/lessees, using the power of eminent domain. Since, at first blush, it appeared that the State of Hawaii was merely transferring private property from one private per son to another in defiance of the public use requirement of eminent domain, serious doubts were raised as to the constitutionality of the Act. The United States Supreme Court, however, had "no trouble concluding" that the Act was a constitutional exercise of the eminent domain power. The Court gave complete deference to the Hawaii legislature's determination of public use" by classifying the Act as ordinary socio-economic legislation enacted pursuant to the state's police power. By focusing on the breadth of a state's police power and on the deferential standard of review, the Court successfully avoided an independent examination of public use, a traditional judicial function. This Note will demonstrate that the Supreme Court's deference to the Hawaii legislature's public use determination was an unwarranted departure from case precedent and that the Court should have decided the case on the merits. This Note also will argue that the minimum rationality standard generally used to review socio-economic legislation is inappropriate in state eminent domain cases because only the state's power ...