지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The existing of Korean Constitution is prescribed some Articles. Art. 40 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea provisions that “Legislative Power is shall be vested in the National Assembly.” And Art. 52 declares that “Bills may be introduced by members of the National Assembly or by the Executive.” And Art. 75 expressly mentions that “The President may issue presidential decrees concerning matters delegated to him by law with the scope specifically defined and also matters necessary to enforce laws.” And Art. 95 also states that “The Prime Minister or the head of the each Executive Minister may, under the powers delegated by law or Presidential Decree, or ex officio, issue ordinances of the Prime Minister or the Executive Ministry concerning matters that are within their jurisdiction.”Traditional view from division of powers doctrine does not allow the executive to have a legislative power. However, as modern democratic state does not draw a line between the powers and the executive obtain the democratic fairness, the line between the powers became thinner.
This phenomenon results from the complexity of legislative procedures, and the promptness, the necessity and the efficiency also play a major role. However, the expanded power of the executive and increased legislative power can cause irreversible impact on the state. Increased power of the executive can endanger the division of powers doctrine and Constitutionalism.
Therefore, controlling issues of legislative power in the government requires comprehensive evaluation instead of limited review of three branches. If National Assembly is controlled by multiple parties, the bills can be passed by the intention of its government instead of hands of the legislature. The control of legislative power cannot be secured by the increased power of legislature. Internal control of the executive and judiciary control can also be recommended. Internal control of the government can be considered as the self regulating tool but the increased power of the government has its own limitation. Legislative control has its own narrow view of understanding the reality and judicial control does not function as pro active control.
As each state has its own individual background of legal culture and politics, one country’s success does not guarantee that of another. Nevertheless, careful review of one’s success can improve current system and establish its solid base for future of the Korean provisions-related. Also, provisions-related and legislative power precedents of the United States of America(Especially, APA) and United Kingdom(Especially, The Statutory Instrument Law) can improve Korean legal system.
In conclusion, legislation of administrative should be controlled for the public benefit because such systems exist for the people.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (49)
참고문헌 신청
/ 1993 / Commission on Human Right Reslution 1992/54, 3 March 1992, annex; General Assembly Resolution 48/134
Cesil T. Carr / 1941 / Concerning English Administration Law / Columbia University Press
Cesil T. Carr / 1955 / Parliamentary Supervision in Britain / N. Y. U. Law Review 30
Cesil T. Carr / 1956 / Parliamentary Control of Delegated Legislation / Public Law
Evan J. Criddle / 2008 / Chevron's consensus / Boston University Law Review 88
Cesil T. Carr / 1941 / Concerning English Administration Law / Columbia University Press
Cesil T. Carr / 1955 / Parliamentary Supervision in Britain / N. Y. U. Law Review 30
Cesil T. Carr / 1956 / Parliamentary Control of Delegated Legislation / Public Law
Evan J. Criddle / 2008 / Chevron's consensus / Boston University Law Review 88
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0