資料載入處理中...
臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統
:::
網站導覽
國圖首頁
聯絡我們
操作說明
English
行動版
(18.117.152.250)
登入
字型:
**字體大小變更功能,需開啟瀏覽器的JAVASCRIPT,如您的瀏覽器不支援,
IE6請利用鍵盤按住ALT鍵 + V → X → (G)最大(L)較大(M)中(S)較小(A)小,來選擇適合您的文字大小,
如為IE7以上、Firefoxy或Chrome瀏覽器則可利用鍵盤 Ctrl + (+)放大 (-)縮小來改變字型大小。
來源文獻查詢
引文查詢
瀏覽查詢
作者權威檔
引用/點閱統計
我的研究室
資料庫說明
相關網站
來源文獻查詢
/
簡易查詢
/
查詢結果列表
/
詳目列表
:::
詳目顯示
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆
/1
頁
來源文獻資料
外文摘要
引文資料
題名:
Japanese Way of Judicial Appointment and Its Impact on Judicial Review
書刊名:
National Taiwan University Law Review
作者:
Ii, Takayuki
出版日期:
2010
卷期:
5:2
頁次:
頁73-111
主題關鍵詞:
Judicial review
;
Judicial selection
;
Judicial reform
;
Lower court judges nominating consultation commission
;
Nameless faceless judiciary
原始連結:
連回原系統網址
相關次數:
被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
排除自我引用:0
共同引用:
10
點閱:44
Japanese judiciary has been described as passive or self-restrained in judicial review. The Supreme Court of Japan has declared statutes to be unconstitutional in only eight cases since 1947. Among explanations of Japanese court’s self-restraint, this paper focuses judicial appointment. Attention is paid to the judicial reform in the early 21st century, particularly the setting up of the Lower Court Judges Nominating Consultation Commission, which was established in 2003. This paper tries to answer the question: “Does the judicial reform in the early 21st century have an impact on constitutional review?’’ by taking a socio-legal approach. Consideration is made on four sections: (II) adoption of the Constitution after World War II; (III) procedure of judicial appointment in the second half of the 20th century; (IV) judicial reform and birth of the Lower Court Judges Nominating Consultation Commission in the early 21st century, and (V) effectiveness of recent judicial reform on judicial activism. In conclusion, the answer to the question is that the judicial reform in the early 21st century does not seem to have an impact on judicial review. There are mainly three backgrounds: separation of powers in postwar Japan with little checks and balances, the persistence of arbitrary judicial personnel management within the court, and an ideology of “nameless faceless judiciary.” A few signs of change have been emerging, among others, a change of power from the LDP to the Democratic Party; however, judicial appointment in itself does not seem to have an impact on judicial review in Japan.
以文找文
期刊論文
1.
Yeh, Jiunn-Rong、Chang, Wen-Chen(20090300)。The Changing Landscape of Modern Constitutionalism: Transitional Perspective。National Taiwan University Law Review,4(1),145-183。
2.
Hasebe, Y.(2003)。Constitutional borrowing and political theory。International Journal of Constitutional Law,1(2),224-243。
3.
Kawagishi, N.(2007)。The birth of judicial review in Japan。International Journal of Constitutional Law,5,308-331。
4.
Abe, M.(1995)。The internal control of a bureaucratic judiciary: The case of Japan。International Journal of the Sociology of Law,23(4),303-320。
5.
Foote, D. H.(2007)。Recent reforms to the Japanese judiciary: Real changeor mere appearance?.。Houshakaigaku [Sociology of Law],,66,128-161。
6.
Hattori, T.(1984)。The role of the Supreme Court of Japan in the field of judicial administration。Washington Law Review,60,69-86。
7.
Ii, T.(2005)。Saibankan Seido Kaikaku no rinen to jitsuzou [Ideal and realpicture of the Judge System Reform]。Shihou kaikaku tyousashitsu hou[Research office for judicial reform review],5,11-59。
8.
Ii, T.(2007)。Nihon ni okeru saibankan sennin seido no saiteii: MeritSelection no keijyu to henyou [Repositioning Japanese judicialselection system: Succession and acculturation of the American MeritSelection]。Aomori Law and Political Science Review,8,62-90。
9.
Ii, T.(2009)。Merit Selection no shiten kara mita Kakyuu SaibanshoSaibankan Shimei Shimon Iinkai [Lower court Judges NominatingAdvisory Commission seen from the viewpoint of Merit Selection]。Jiyu to Seigi [Liberty and Justice],60(10),10-21。
10.
Takii, S.(2009)。Saikou Saibansho wa kawatta ka: Ichi saibankan no jikokenshou [Has the Supreme Court changed?: Self-verification by onejudge]。
會議論文
1.
Saibankan no Ninmei ni Tsuite [On the appointment of the SupremeCourt Justices]。
2.
Nihon Bengoshi Rengoukai(2005)。The Japan Federation of Bar Associations。
3.
Saikōsaibansho.(2001)。Saibankan seido no kaikaku ni tsuite [Onthe reform of the judge system].。
研究報告
1.
Kenpo Tyosakai [Commission on the Constitution](1959)。Kenpo Tyosakaidaiichi iinkai dai ichi-nana kai kaigi giziroku [Minutes of the 1st-7thmeetings of the 1st Committee of the Commission on the Constitution]。Tokyo, Japan。
圖書
1.
Koseki, S.、Moore, Ray A.(1997)。The birth of Japan’s postwar constitution。Boulder, CO:Westview Press。
2.
Ramseyer, J. Mark、Rasmusen, Eric(2003)。Measuring Judicial Independence: The Political Economy of Judging in Japan。University of Chicago Press。
3.
Ginsburg, Tom(2003)。Judicial review in new democracies: constitutional courts in Asian cases。Cambridge University Press。
4.
Abe, H.(2001)。Inu ni narenakatta saibankan: Shihou kanryo tousei nikoushite 36 nen [A judge who could not become a dog: 36 years resisting judicial bureaucracy control]。Tokyo, Japan。
5.
Beer, L. W.,、Itoh, H.(1996)。The constitutional case law of Japan: 1970 through 1990。Seattle, WA。
6.
Danelski, D. J.(1969)。The Supreme Court of Japan: An exploratory study。Comparative judicial behavior: Cross-cultural studies of political decision-making in the East and West。New York, NY。
7.
Foote, D. H.(2006)。Saiban to shakai: Shihou no “jyoushiki” saikou [Thecourts and society: Stereotypes of justice reexamined]。Tokyo, Japan。
8.
Foote, D. H.(2007)。Na mo nai kao mo nai shihou: Nihon no saiban wakawaru noka [Faceless nameless judiciary: Will Japanese judiciary change?]。Tokyo, Japan。
9.
Fukushima, M., Mizushima, A.,、Oode, Y.(2009)。Nagamuna jiken Hiragashokan: 35 nenme no shogen—Jieitai iken hanketsu to shiho no kiki[Naganuma case and a letter from Hiraga: Witness in the 35thyears—Unconstitutional decision of Self Defense Force and crisis ofthe judiciary]。Tokyo, Japan。
10.
Haley, J. O.(2008)。The Japanese judiciary: Maintaining integrity, autonomy, and the public trust。Law in Japan: A turning point。Seattle, WA。
11.
Inumaru, H.(1989)。Nihonkoku Kenpou seitei no katei [Circumstancesof drafting the Constitution of Japan]。Tokyo, Japan。
12.
Itoh, H.(1989)。The Japanese Supreme Court: Constitutional policies。New York, NY:Markus Wiener。
13.
Itoh, H.,、Beer, L. W.(1978)。The constitutional case law of Japan: Selected Supreme Court decisions, 1961-70。Seattle, WA。
14.
Maki, J. M.(1964)。Court and constitution in Japan: Selected Supreme Court decisions, 1948-60。Seattle, WA。
15.
Malleson, K.,、Russell, P. H.(2006)。Appointing judges in an age of judicial power。Toronto, ON。
16.
Martin, J.(1993)。Merit Selection Commissions: What do they do? How effective are they?。Chicago, IL。
17.
Miyazawa, S.(1994)。Administrative control of Japanese judges。Law and technology in the Pacific community。Boulder, CO。
18.
Nagamine, M.(2007)。Saikou desuka? Saikousai! [Is it supreme? SupremeCourt!]。Tokyo, Japan。
19.
Naito, Y.(1959)。Shusengo no shihoseido kaikaku no Keika I [Detailsof the judicial reform after the war Part I]。Tokyo, Japan。
20.
O’Brien, D. M.,、Ohkoshi, Y.(2001)。Stifling judicial independence from within: The Japanese judiciary。Judicial independence in the age of democracy: Critical perspectives from around the world。Charlottesville, VA。
21.
Oppler, A. C.(1976)。Legal reform in occupied Japan: A participant looks back。Princeton, NJ。
22.
Saikōsaibansho(2004)。Saibansho data book 2004 [Court data book2004].。Tokyo, Japan。
23.
Sheldon, C. H.,、Maule, L. S.(1997)。Choosing justice: The recruitment of state and federal judges。Pullman, WA。
24.
Shiho Kenshujo(2004)。Shiho shushusei binran [The legal apprentice handbook]。Saitama, Japan。
25.
Takayanagi, K., Ootomo, I.,、Tanaka, H.(1972)。Nihonkoku Kempou seiteino Katei II [The making of the Constitution of Japan part II]。Tokyo,Japan。
26.
Tanaka, H.(1973)。Eibei no shihou: Saibansho, houritsuka [Courts and theprofession in England and in the United States]。Tokyo, Japan。
27.
Tomatsu, H.(2001)。Judicial review in Japan: An overview of efforts to introduce U.S. theories。Five decades of constitutionalism in Japanese society。Tokyo, Japan。
28.
Volcansek, M. L.,、Lafon, J. L.(1988)。Judicial selection: The cross-evolution of French and American practices。New York, NY。
推文
當script無法執行時可按︰
推文
推薦
當script無法執行時可按︰
推薦
引用網址
當script無法執行時可按︰
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
當script無法執行時可按︰
引用嵌入語法
轉寄
當script無法執行時可按︰
轉寄
top
:::
相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱
1.
東亞研究的省思
2.
A Judicial Response to the Call of National Reconstruction: Revisiting the Supreme Court of Japan's Adjudication of the Cabinet Order No. 325
3.
法律解釋理論的重新建構--機制取徑與系統性的成本效益分析?[評Adrian Vermeule, «Judging under Uncertainty: An Institutional Theory of Legal Interpretation (在不確定下判決--法律解釋的制度理論)» (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2006)]
4.
Globalization, Government Reform and the Paradigm Shift of Administrative Law
5.
Asian Constitutionalism at Crossroads: New Challenges and Opportunities
6.
Asian Constitutions in Comparative Perspectives
7.
The Changing Landscape of Modern Constitutionalism: Transitional Perspective
8.
The Emergence of Asian Constitutionalism: Features in Comparison
9.
Towards a Global Constitutional Gene Pool
無相關博士論文
1.
氣候變遷治理與法律:全球治理.政策工具.關鍵議題.制度規範
2.
[轉型中的東亞法院:基本形貌、紛爭解決與行政治理]緒論
無相關著作
無相關點閱
QR Code