论文部分内容阅读
司法审查主体的司法哲学直接决定着司法审查是否启动及其最终结果是合宪有效判决还是违宪无效判决。司法审查哲学分为两种:积极主义和消极主义。这两种哲学立场在司法审查中彼此较量,从而在司法审查实践中形成了四类司法审查哲学样态,即典型消极主义、入口消极主义、出口消极主义和典型积极主义。在我国,法官在司法实践中涉及司法审查时必须格外慎重。只要有可能,司法审查主体应该采取消极主义司法哲学,以回避与人大立法机关或政府行政部门发生价值冲突。而在非常必要之时则需坚决地择取积极主义司法哲学,使宪法规定的“国家尊重和保障人权”得到实然的保障。这一切取决于司法审查制度在我国的真正建立。
Judicial review of the main body of the judicial philosophy directly determines whether the judicial review started and whether the final result is a constitutional effective judgment or unconstitutional verdicts. There are two kinds of judicial review philosophy: activism and negativeism. These two kinds of philosophical positions compete with each other in judicial review, thus forming four kinds of philosophical patterns of judicial review in judicial review practice, namely typical negativeism, negative entranceism, negative exportation and typical activism. In our country, judges must take extra care when it comes to judicial review in judicial practice. Whenever possible, the judicial review body should adopt a negative judicial philosophy to avoid the value conflict with the legislature of the NPC or the government administration. When necessary, resolutely choose positive judicial philosophy, so that the Constitution provides “the state respects and protects human rights” to be guaranteed. All this depends on the establishment of judicial review system in our country.