CONTROL FUNCTION OF PARLIAMENT AND PRINCIPLE OF DIVISION OF POWERS

The article analyzes using the normative and systematic methods, as well as analysis and synthesis, the content of the statements of the Constitution of the Kyrgyz Republic, the Law of the Kyrgyz Republic «On Regulations of the Jogorku Kenesh of the Kyrgyz Republic», decisions of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of the Kyrgyz Republic and the works of legal scholars. The article is devoted to the study of the postulate that the principle of division of powers has a deep theoretical basis, which has been developed since existence of institution of state and is aimed at identifying clear boundaries of authority between individual branches of government in order to build their structure so that they serve society. The author came to the conclusion that parliamentary control is in direct connection with the principle of division of powers, in this system it serves and acts as element of mutual control of branches of government. The judiciary today also unequivocally determines inadmissibility of overarching function, the priority role of legislative branch over other parts of government. Parliamentary control is in direct connection with the principle of division of powers, in this system it serves and acts as an element of mutual control of branches of government. According to the author, presence of such control in practice constantly leads to idea of the priority role of legislative branch, which leads to weakening of principle of division of powers. However, it should be noted the implementation of control powers is not aimed at determining the priority of legislative branch in system of division of powers; parliamentary control only organizationally implements of existing powers of parliament.

Download Full-text

Intergovernmental Relations‘ Third Wheel: The Role of the Supreme Court in an Era of Collaborative Federalism

Federalism-E ◽

10.24908/fede.v10i1.13629 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 1-15

Author(s):

Allison O‘Beirne

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Intergovernmental Relations ◽

Supreme Court Of Canada ◽

Division Of Powers ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Way

The Supreme Court of Canada has an absolutely undeniable role in intergovernmental relations. As the country‘s only constitutionally entrenched body charged with the resolution of division-of-powers disputes, its decisions and rulings are always certain to influence the way in which governments interact with each other. Recently, however, the Supreme Court has come to be less highly regarded as a method of resolving the disputes that arise between governments [...]

Download Full-text

The Return of Federalism and Constitutional Politics: Analyzing the Role of the Supreme Court as an Arbiter in Contemporary Political Society

Federalism-E ◽

10.24908/fede.v14i1.13609 ◽

1969 ◽

Vol 14 (1) ◽

pp. 5-20

Author(s):

Marjun Parcasio

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

The Political ◽

Political Society ◽

Constitutional Politics ◽

Constitutional Order ◽

The Past ◽

Division Of Powers ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Death Experience

Since the ascendancy of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the centrepiece of a new constitutional order in Canada, there has been a distinctive decline of federal discourse in the courts and within the political sphere. Traditional cases pertaining to the division of powers at the Supreme Court have been eclipsed by the novelty of rights jurisprudence that has consumed the court in the past three decades1. Moreover, constitutional issues have been considered an anathema since the failure of the negotiations at Meech Lake and Charlottetown, exacerbated by the near-death experience for federalism in the 1995 referendum in Québec. In recent years, however, the changing nature of Canada’s political dynamics has signalled a return of federalism and constitutional politics [...]

Download Full-text

The Role of the Supreme Court in a Democracy

Israel Law Review ◽

10.1017/s0021223700015879 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 33 (1) ◽

pp. 1-12 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Aharon Barak

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Executive Branch ◽

Checks And Balances ◽

Equal Status ◽

The Third ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Legislative Branch ◽

The Law ◽

The Relationship

There are three constitutional branches: the legislative branch, the executive branch, and the judicial branch, and they are the product of our constitution, our Basic Laws. They are of equal status, and the relationship between them is one of “checks and balances”. This system is designed to assure that each branch operates within the confines of its authority, for no branch may have unlimited powers. The purpose of checks and balances is not effective government; its purpose is to guarantee freedom.In this system of powers, the task of the judicial branch is to adjudicate conflicts according to the laws. For that purpose, the judicial branch has to perform three principal functions. The first is concerned with determining the facts. From the entirety of the facts, one should determine those facts which are relevant to adjudicating the conflict. The second function is concerned with determining the law. The third function is concerned with applying the law to the facts, and drawing the appropriate judicial conclusion.

Download Full-text

Remote Proceedings in the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

Pravosudie / Justice ◽

10.37399/2686-9241.2020.3.100-118 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2 (3) ◽

pp. 100-118

Author(s):

A. S. German ◽

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Russian Federation ◽

Theoretical Basis ◽

Information Technologies ◽

Systematic Approach ◽

Systematic Analysis ◽

Social Distancing ◽

Legal Proceedings ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Russian Federation

Introduction. Currently, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, like many state bodies, is faced with a global challenge – the coronavirus pandemic, which has affected all public processes. The need for social distancing has contributed to the more active use of modern technologies that facilitate remote court hearings. Theoretical basis. Methods. The theoretical basis of the study were the Russian and foreign scientific works devoted to the problems of introducing information technologies into judicial activity. The methodological basis of the study was a systematic approach that made it possible to consider the possibilities of remote justice in its relationship to significant factors of a legal and organisational nature. The study used the methods of logical generalisations, analysis and synthesis, together with a systematic approach and the method of comparative jurisprudence. Results. The article briefly presents the results of a systematic analysis of measures carried out by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation aimed at ensuring the widespread use of remote technologies in the administration of justice. Discussion and Conclusion. Given the current pandemic situation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has introduced integrated related web conferencing and video conferencing technologies for remote court hearings. These technologies began to be actively used by courts during the pandemic period. Their application ensures a reasonable time frame for legal proceedings and makes it possible to ensure the availability of justice even in conditions of social distancing. The undoubted advantage of remote technologies is their potential to reduce procedural costs in the course of legal proceedings. However, the issues under consideration require further research, as well as preparation of conceptual suggestions to the legislator aimed at optimising procedural legislation.

Download Full-text