论文部分内容阅读
香港法院根据《基本法》在司法审查案件中检视立法与行政机关的决定,审查基准的设定一定程度上反映出法院与其他宪制角色的关系。经济、社会权利与传统的公民、政治权利不同,在这一类型案件中,立法和行政机关的裁量空间更为广泛,法院因此会适用较宽松的审查基准。然而,香港终审法院在孔允明案中运用与下级法院截然不同的推理方式,在宽松的审查基准下对政策制定的实质性依据进行了审查。通过分析本案中香港终审法院在调整与立法、行政关系方面作出的创新性尝试,可以进一步解读马道立法庭的司法态度。
According to the Basic Law, the Hong Kong courts examine the decisions of the legislature and the executive authorities in judicial review cases. The setting of the review base reflects to some extent the relationship between the court and other constitutional roles. Economic and social rights are different from traditional civil and political rights. In this type of case, the discretion of legislative and executive authorities is more extensive and the court will therefore apply a more lenient examination standard. However, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, in Kong Chu-ming’s case, used a distinct method of reasoning from the lower courts to examine the substantive basis for policy formulation under a lenient examination basis. By analyzing the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal’s innovative attempts to adjust its relations with the legislature and the administration in this case, we can further interpret the judicial attitude of the tribunal of Madhox.