| Project/Area Number |
16K03285
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
|
| Allocation Type | Multi-year Fund |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
Public law
|
|---|
| Research Institution | Kanazawa University |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2016-04-01 – 2019-03-31
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2018)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥3,120,000 (Direct Cost: ¥2,400,000、Indirect Cost: ¥720,000)
Fiscal Year 2018: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
Fiscal Year 2017: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
Fiscal Year 2016: ¥1,040,000 (Direct Cost: ¥800,000、Indirect Cost: ¥240,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | 意に反する苦役 / 国民主権 / 民主主義 / 裁判員制度 / 遡及処罰禁止原則 / 法的安定性 / 憲法保障 / 国家緊急権 / 抵抗権 / 憲法の最高法規性 / 統治主体 / デモクラシー / 刑事法 / 国民主権原理 |
|---|
| Outline of Final Research Achievements |
The Supreme Court Decision of 2011, which has the lay judge system as constitutional, understands the principle of national sovereignty as the same content as the democratic principle, and the lay judge system is permitted from these two principles. However, the Supreme Court decision of 2011 argue that the duties of the lay judges does not fall Article 18 later in the Constitution. It implicitly affirms that the necessity and rationality of a lay judge system is not very high. We should re-examine legislative relevance of the lay judge system.
|
| Academic Significance and Societal Importance of the Research Achievements |
裁判員制度の定着が広く報道される一方，その憲法原理との関係や，立法政策上の妥当性については，依然として議論が十分ではない。本研究は，同制度の定着以前に，同制度の原理的問題が解決していないことを明らかにし，そして，同制度を合憲と判示した最高裁ですら，同制度への参加を強制することの政策上の必要性・合理性に関して，必ずしも十分な確信を有しているわけではないことを明らかにした。
|
