憲法修正に対する司法審査 : 我が国における憲法改正論議への理論的視座として

概要

論文の詳細を見る
In these day, some of American constitutional and political schollars suggested polemical arguments over the constitutional amending that can be categorized into htree ones:(1)Are there some limitations on the constitutional amending? (2)Is it possible for the U.S. Supreme Court to review the constitutional amending? (3)Is it natural for it to do such a thing? These Arguments have provoked conflicts in three arenas:(A)Expressly limitations on the substantive of the constitutional amendment, (B)Implied limitations on the substantive of the constitutional amendment, (C)Implied limitations on the procedure of constitutional amendment. When We, in this report, study on the matters above, taking it for granted that the constitutional amending power should be conceived to be "Institutionalized constituent power", because of the validity of the legal positivistic interpretation of the text of the U.S. Constitution Article V ordaining the constitutional amending process, We will get jurisprudential implication usefull for the argument over the revision of JAPANESE CONSTITUTION. All things considered, we conclude that (A)-(1)Yes, (A)-(2)Yes, (A)-(3)Yes, (B)-(1)Yes, (B)-(2)Yes, (B)-(3)Yes(limited admition), (C)-(1)Yes, (C)-(2)Yes, (C)-(3)No-these answers can be justified by the principle of constitutional democracy.
日本法政学会の論文
1995-05-15