Fandom

VroniPlag Wiki

Wy/031

< Wy

31.377Seiten in
diesem Wiki
Seite hinzufügen
Diskussion0 Teilen

Störung durch Adblocker erkannt!


Wikia ist eine gebührenfreie Seite, die sich durch Werbung finanziert. Benutzer, die Adblocker einsetzen, haben eine modifizierte Ansicht der Seite.

Wikia ist nicht verfügbar, wenn du weitere Modifikationen in dem Adblocker-Programm gemacht hast. Wenn du sie entfernst, dann wird die Seite ohne Probleme geladen.

Research on Parliamentary Privilege Concurrently Discuss Chinese National People's Congressional Privilege

von Weizhong Yi

vorherige Seite | zur Übersichtsseite | folgende Seite
Statistik und Sichtungsnachweis dieser Seite findet sich am Artikelende
[1.] Wy/Fragment 031 03 - Diskussion
Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2013-09-15 19:45:44 Agrippina1
Fragment, Gesichtet, Griffith 2009, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung, Wy

Typus
Verschleierung
Bearbeiter
Graf Isolan
Gesichtet
Yes.png
Untersuchte Arbeit:
Seite: 31, Zeilen: 3-16, 19, 102-103
Quelle: Griffith 2009
Seite(n): 6-7, Zeilen: 6:18-25 - 7:1-11
4.2 Constitutional Functions

If parliamentary privilge [sic] is set in a broader constitutional context, the justification for parliamentary privilge [sic] is that the freedom to control their own proceedings and the freedom of speech in Parliament are necessary if the Houses of Parliamentary [sic] are to fulfill their constitutional functions effectively, that is, to inquire, debate and legislate. In Vaid case, the supreme court of Canada said that parliamentary privilge [sic] is necessary “to protect legislator in discharge of their legislative and deliberative functions, and the legislative assembly’s work in government to account for the conduct of the country’s business.107

The UK Joint Committee had this to say:

Without this protection, Members of Parliament would be handicapped in performing their parliamentary duties, and the authority of Parliament itself in confronting the executive and as a deliberative forum would be diminished.108

4.3 Separation of Powers

[...] Parliamentary privilege can be located [within what has been called the ‘rough’ doctrine of the separation of powers.]


107 Canada (House of Commons) v. Vaid [2005] SCC 30, at para. 41.

108 Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, p.8.

[Seite 6]

2.5 Constitutional functions

In Vaid parliamentary privilege is set in a broader constitutional context. The justification for parliamentary privilege is that the freedom to control their own proceedings and the freedom of speech in Parliament are necessary if the Houses of Parliament are to perform their constitutional functions effectively - that is, to inquire, debate and legislate. The Supreme Court of Canada said that parliamentary privilege is ‘necessary’ to protect legislators in the discharge of their legislative and deliberative

[Seite 7]

functions, and the legislative assembly’s work in holding the government to account for the conduct of the country’s business.26

The UK Joint Committee had this to say:

Without this protection, members of Parliament would be handicapped in performing their parliamentary duties, and the authority of Parliament itself in confronting the executive and as a deliberative forum would be diminished.27

2.6 Separation of powers

Parliamentary privilege can be located within what has been called the ‘rough’ doctrine of the separation of powers that operates in Westminster parliamentary systems.


26 [2005] 1 SCR 667 at para 41.

27 Joint Committee on Parliamentary Privilege, n 6, p 8.

Anmerkungen

Kein Hinweis auf eine Übernahme.

Sichter
(Graf Isolan) Agrippina1


vorherige Seite | zur Übersichtsseite | folgende Seite
Letzte Bearbeitung dieser Seite: durch Benutzer:Graf Isolan, Zeitstempel: 20130915194740

Auch bei Fandom

Zufälliges Wiki