http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Petro Martinenko (검색결과 2 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
Expertise of the Constitutional Jurisdiction : Ukrainian Model
Petro Martinenko 국제헌법학회 한국학회 2000 世界憲法硏究 Vol.5 No.-
The Constitutional Court of Ukraine was formed in October 1996. having solved the questions of its own internal organizational activity and regimentation, the Court began reviewing cases at the plenary session regime on April 17, 1997. Since then the Constitutional Court of Ukraine as the sole organ of the constitutional jurisdiction in Ukraine examined 205 cases, adopted 34 Judgments (or General Decisions), granted 2 Conclusions, adopted 169 Decisions on the refusal in opening of constitutional litigation proceedings. The judicial practice of such a kind is an important component of recognition of the principle of rule of law and the highest legal force of the new Constitution of Ukraine, which served an virtual watershed with reference to the past time of the former USSR, having nailed down the ideas of building the new independent Ukraine as the liberal democratic state. In the Constitutional Court, the representation of both Verkhovna Rada (the Parliament of Ukraine) and the President of Ukraine is provided on the regular (permanent) basis. By exercising its functions, this sole Constitutional jurisdiction body keeps the close contacts with mass media having been permanently accredited. The Constitutional Court Judges, their consultants and assistants take active part in the social opinion formation. These years of the Constitutional adjudicative practice do not only testify a high status of the Constitutional Court as an essential component of constitutional system of power in Ukraine, but also acknowledges its increasing authority within Ukrainian society. At the same time, as an experience approved, not all Constitutional Court dicisions are perceived by the public opinion unambiguously. Some of them provoke stormy polemics, other ones inadmissibility. Sometimes the very definition of the Constitutional Court as a Court is thrown under discredit. However, the new democratic institute has already rooted into the Ukrainian political legal ground. The 18 Judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine reflect the parity of three branches of power in the state: legislature, executive and judiciary (6 Judges from each). In the end of 1997, the attempt made by one of them to take the constitutional adjudication under its own control was not successful and caused common indignation. The goal of this report is to analyze the results of the Constitutional Court activity in the realm of Con adjudication: by means of the self-perception by the Court of the extent and limits of own constitutional power, its approaches to resolve particular categories of cases as well as its advancing the constitutional reality development in Ukraine. On this way the Constitutional Court activity could have been has been marked by both apparent manifestations of success and some definite difficulties.
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
