检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:阎天[1] YAN Tian
机构地区:[1]北京大学法学院,北京100871
出 处:《学术月刊》2022年第2期103-112,共10页Academic Monthly
摘 要:自现行宪法出台以来,我国劳动法学界形成了难以自洽的宪法观:一方面强调劳动法作为宪法实施法的地位,用宪法论证劳动法作为法律部门的独立性,支持其改革劳动法治的主张;另一方面并未将宪法当作法律规范加以准确解释,而是在基本原则和具体制度层面都反复偏出宪法原意,且这种偏出缺乏正当性。这种宪法观无法让劳动法真正融入以宪法为核心的法律秩序,应当引入部门宪法的理念加以改造。为此,既要积极将劳动法问题上升到宪法层面思考,又要采取温和的原旨主义解释立场,注重运用历史和体系的解释方法,准确衡量各种解释素材的权威性。China’ s labor law academia has developed a self-contradicted understanding of the Chinese Constitution since its enactment in 1982. Labor law scholars emphasized labor law’s function to implement the Constitution, justified labor law’ s independence as a department of law with the Constitution, and proposed labor law reforms based on the Constitution. Nevertheless, they have not interpreted the Constitution correctly as legal norms. Rather, they deviated from the original meaning of the Constitution repeatedly on the levels of general principles and concreted institutions of labor law. Such an understanding of the Constitution cannot merge labor law into the legal order concentrated around the Constitution. It shall be reformed by introducing the vision of departmental constitutionalism. To do that, labor law questions shall be robustly elevated to constitutional level for answers;historical and systematic methods of constitutional interpretation shall be deployed, and the authoritativeness of verified sources of interpretation shall be weighed properly.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.62