The Position of Comparative Law in The Judgments of The Constitutional Courts in The Common Law and Civil Law Countries

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Damghan University, Damghan, Iran

Abstract

The problem of the position of comparative law in the judgments of the constitutional courts in the Common law and Civil law countries is a very interesting research topic since each of these bodies has a different view on the issue. In other words, the different opinions on the subject show well how constitutional judges consider the effects and characteristics of the citation of foreign norms in their decisions. In this article based on the descriptive and deductive method, we will try to answer the following question: what are the strengths and weaknesses of citing foreign norms in the judgments of the national Constitutional courts? After the presentation of the data, we will demonstrate that despite some weaknesses such as dangers for State sovereignty and the widening of the sources of law, thanks to the caution of the Constitutional judges and the citation of norms of legal systems which are close from a geographical and cultural point of view and to the use of comparison not exclusively for applying foreign law, the use of judicial and legal sources from other countries can help the development of domestic law and expand the protection of fundamental rights.

Keywords

References

1. فارسی
1. ایزدی، علی (1394)، «نگاهی تطبیقی به اجرای حقوق بین‌الملل در محاکم ملی»، فصلنامۀ مطالعات حقوق عمومی، دورۀ 45، ش 3.
2. برجیان، علی و الدباغ، حارث (1397)، «اصلاح نظام‌های حقوقی در گذر تکامل حقوق تطبیقی»، فصلنامۀ پژوهش حقوق عمومی، سال بیستم، ش 60.
3. شیروی، عبدالحسین (1391)، حقوق تطبیقی، تهران: سمت.
4. محسنی، الهه (1398)، «روش‌شناسی حقوق تطبیقی»، مطالعات حقوق تطبیقی، دورۀ 10، ش 2.
2. خارجی
5. Ackerman, B. (1997), "The Rise of World Constitutionalism", Virginia Law Review, V. 83, N. 4, 771-797.
6. Bernardini, A. M. (2009), Diritti diversi, Milano, Bompiani.
7. Buonuomo, G. (2006), "Il diritto straniero e la Corte Suprema Statunitense", Quaderni costituzionali, A. 26, N. 2, 281-295.
8. Cavino, M., Tripodina, C. (2012), La tutela dei diritti fondamentali tra diritto politico e diritto giurisprudenziale, Milano, Giuffré.
9. Chenwi, L. (2007), Towards the Abolition of the Death Penalty in Africa: A Human Rights Perspective, Pretoria, Pretoria University Press.
10. Ciccarelli, A., Gargiulo, P. (2012), La dimensione sociale dell’Unione Europea alla prova della crisi globale, Roma, Franco Angeli.
11. D’Alessandro, C., Marchese, C. (2018), Ius Dicere in a Globalized World, Roma, Roma Tre Press.
12. Dau, F. R. (2011), Costituzionalismo e rappresentanza. Il caso del Sudafrica, Milano, Giuffré.
13. De Schutter, O. (2019), International Human Rights Law, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
14. De Vergottini, G, (2010), Oltre il dialogo tra le corti, Bologna, Il Mulino.
15. Diurni, A. (2008), Percorsi mondiali di diritto privato e comparato, Torino, Giappichelli.
16. Ferrari, G., Gambaro, A. (2006), Corti nazionali e comparazione giuridica, Napoli, Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane.
17. Gilardi, M. G. (2016), Cultura e comparazione giuridica. Profili generali, Varazze, PM Edizioni.
18. Groppi, T. (2011), "La citazione delle sentenze straniere da parte delle Corti costituzionali: effettività, novità, rischi e potenzialità", in D’Amico, M., Randazzo, B. (Eds.), Alle frontiere del diritto costituzionale, Milano, Giuffré, 969-983.
19. Harding, S. (2003), "Comparative Reasoning and Judicial Review", Yale Journal of International Law, V. 28, I. 2, 409-464.
20. Lehmann, W. (2010), "Democrazia europea, identità costituzionale e sovranità", Bruxelles, Policy Department C - Citizens' Rights and Constitutional Affairs, 1-29.
21. Levi Catellani, E. (1988), Il diritto internazionale privato e i suoi recenti progressi, Milano, Giuffré. 
22. Martino, P. (2014), I giudici di Common Law e la cross-fertilization: I casi di Stati Uniti d’America, Canada, Unione Indiana e Regno Unito, Rimini, Maggioli.
23. Parrish, A. L., (2007), "Storm in a Teacup: the U. S. Supreme Court’s Use of Foreign Law", University of Illinos Law Review, V. 37, N. 2, 637-680.
24. Passaglia, P. (2013), "Il diritto comparato nella giurisprudenza della Corte costituzionale", Consulta On Line, N. 2, 589-611.
25. Pepe, V. (2018), "La prospettiva vichiana nella comparazione giuridica: natura comune e identitaria nell’età della globalizzazione", Rivista AIC, N. 4, 651-660.
26. Rolla, G. (2010), Il sistema costituzionale italiano, Milano, Giuffré.
27. Slaughter, A. M. (1994), "A Tipology of Transjudicial Communication", University of Richmond Law Review, V. 29, I. 1, 99-137.
28. Sperti, A. (2006), "Il dialogo tra le corti costituzionali ed il ricorso alla comparazione giuridica nella esperienza più recente", Rivista di diritto costituzionale, N. 1, 125-165.
 
3. آرای محاکم
29. Bundesverfassungsgericht, n. 392-07, 2008.
30. Bundesverfassungsgericht, n. 2-08, 2009.
31. Constitutional Court of South Africa, The State v. Makwanyane, n. 3-94, 1995.
32. Constitutional Court of South Africa, Minister of Home Affairs v. National Institute for Crime Prevention and Re-Integration of Offenders, n. 445-04, 2004.
33. Constitutional Court of South Africa, Phillips and Others v. National Director of Public Prosecutions, n. 505-04, 2005.
34. Corte costituzionale, n. 334, 2010.
35. Corte costituzionale, n. 180, 2011.
36. Corte costituzionale, n. 172, 2014.
37. High Court of Australia, Kable v. Director of Public Prosecutions, n. 24-96, 1996.
38. Supreme Court of Canada, Law society of Upper Canada v. Skapinker, n. 357-84, 1984.
39. Supreme Court of Canada, Regina v. Keegstra, n. 697-90, 1990.
40. Supreme Court of Canada, Suresh v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, n. 3-02, 2002.
41. Supreme Court of New Zealand, Zaoui v. Attorney General, n. 289, 2006.
42. Supreme Court of United States, Lawrence v. Texas, n. 558, 2003.
43. Supreme Court of United States, Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain, n. 692, 2004.
44. Supreme Court of United States, Roper v. Simmons, n. 551, 2005.
45. Tribunal Constitucional, n. 359, 2009.
46. Tribunal Constitucional, n. 121, 2010.
Comparative Law Review
Volume 11, Issue 2
Autumn & Winter
October 2020
Pages 481-499

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics