 |
English
|
正體中文
|
简体中文
|
Post-Print筆數 : 27 |
Items with full text/Total items : 110936/141856 (78%)
Visitors : 47714987
Online Users : 1117
|
|
|
Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/94557
|
| Title: | 魁北克獨立問題之諮詢意見 |
| Other Titles: | An Analysis of Reference re Secession of Quebec by the Supreme Court of Canada |
| Authors: | 陳盛
Chen, Sheng |
| Keywords: | 魁北克;諮詢意見;片面脫離;自決權;憲政基本原則;憲政協商
Quebec;Reference;Unilateral Secession;Self-Determination;Fundamental Principles of the Constitution;Negotiations Underlying Constitutional Principles |
| Date: | 2005-10 |
| Issue Date: | 2016-05-06 16:55:49 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 加拿大魁北克省分別於1980年與1995年舉行獨立公投，魁獨勢力雖然暫時挫敗，但是獨立聲浪仍方興未艾。加拿大總督依據最高法院法第五十三條，就魁北克脫離聯邦有關之三項疑義，向最高法院提請求裁定諮詢意見：(1)依據憲法，魁北克是否有片面脫離聯邦之權？(2)依據國際法，魁北克是否有片面脫離加拿大之權？(3)上開二項權利是否衝突？加拿大憲法雖無相關規定，但最高法院依據憲政基本原則，認為無論依據國內法或國際法，魁北克省均無片面脫離加拿大聯邦權利。最高法院指出，依據加拿大四項憲政基本原則：(1)聯邦制度、(2)民主制度、(3)憲政法治、(4)保護少數，魁北克人民之明確多數就明確問題，循民主程序所表達之脫離聯邦意願，聯邦政府與其他各省應予尊重，在魁北克公民複決之後，四項憲政基本原則賦予所有聯邦成員「協商」憲法增修之義務。憲法增修顯屬政治決策，不屬司法裁判範圍，最高法院僅說協商所依附之法律結構表示意見。
Quebec held a referendum for secession in 1980 and 1995 respectively. Both time, it turned out in disfavor of sovereign Quebecers. In 1996 Governor in Council, in pursuant to section 53 of the Supreme Court Act, referred to the Supreme Court of Canada for advisory opinion on three questions concerning the secession of Quebec from Canada: (1) Under the Constitution of Canada, can the National Assembly, legislature or government of Quebec effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally? (2) Does International law give the National Assembly, legislature or government of Quebec the right to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally? (3) In the event of a conflict between domestic and international law on the right of the National Assembly, legislature or government of Quebec to effect the secession of Quebec from Canada unilaterally, which one takes precedent? Based on the four fundamental principles of the Constitution, including the principles of federalism, democracy, constitutionalism and the rule of law, and respect for minorities, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the clear repudiation of the existing constitutional order and the clear expression of the desire to pursue secession by the population of a province would give rise to a reciprocal obligation on all parties to the Confederation to negotiate constitutional changes to respond to that desire. The reconciliation of the various legitimate constitutional interests is necessarily confined to the political rather than the judicial realm, precisely because the reconciliation can only be achieved through the give and take of the negotiating process. Having established the legal framework, it would be for the democratically elected leadership of the various participants to resolve their difference. |
| Relation: | 問題與研究, 44(5),53-84
Issues & studies |
| Data Type: | article |
| Appears in Collections: | [問題與研究 TSSCI] 期刊論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 44553.pdf | | 1539Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 359 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.
2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(
nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(
nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
