论文部分内容阅读
司法能动主义施展的范围视授予法院权力的广度而不同。在法院有司法审查权的地方,司法能动主义就有比较大些的施展范围,而这一范围随着司法审查权的扩大而有相当的增长,它不仅象在英国那样对行政行为进行司司法审查,而且象在美国那样也可对立法机关的行为进行司法审查,而且甚至象在印度那样对宪法修正案进行司法审查。把司法审查权扩大到审查宪法修正案,这本身就是印度最高法院在司法能动主义方面的实践。在1973年最高法院法官全体出庭听审的有判例效力的凯萨瓦南达案件中,最高法院借
The scope of judicial activism varies depending on the breadth of power granted to the courts. Where courts have the power of judicial review, judicial activism has a relatively large scope of application, and this scope has increased considerably with the expansion of judicial review power. It not only provides judicial justice for administrative acts like that in the United Kingdom Censorship, and, as in the United States, judicial review of the acts of the legislature, and even judicial review of constitutional amendments as in India. Extending the power of judicial review to reviewing constitutional amendments is in itself the practice of the Supreme Court of India in judicial activism. In the case-based case of Caesar Namida in which all the Supreme Court judges came to court in 1973, the Supreme Court