文献一覧: 藤田宙靖 (著者)

46 0 0 0 OA 最高裁判例とは何か

著者: 藤田宙靖
出版者: 横浜法学会
雑誌: 横浜法学 (ISSN:21881766)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.22, no.3, pp.287-303, 2014-03-25

2023-07-17 15:53:41
45 + 135 Twitter
1 + 1 Wikipedia

http://hdl.handle.net/10131/8648

28 0 0 0 自由裁量論の諸相 : 裁量処分の司法審査を巡って

著者: 藤田宙靖
出版者: 日本学士院
雑誌: 日本學士院紀要 (ISSN:03880036)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.70, no.1, pp.71-90, 2015

2016-08-09 08:03:49
28 + 32 Twitter

8 0 0 0 OA 8 藤田宙靖元最高裁判所判事へのインタビュー

著者: 藤田宙靖
出版者: 北海道大学大学院法学研究科
雑誌: 北大法学論集 (ISSN:03855953)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.66, no.2, pp.83-77, 2015-07-31

2022-05-05 09:07:42
8 + 10 Twitter

http://hdl.handle.net/2115/59598

8 0 0 0 IR 最高裁判例とは何か

著者: 藤田宙靖
出版者: 横浜国立大学
雑誌: 横浜法学 (ISSN:21881766)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.22, no.3, pp.287-303, 2014-03

2021-12-08 13:34:00
7 + 22 Twitter
1 + 1 Wikipedia

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/110009857944

5 0 0 0 覚え書き : 集団的自衛権の行使容認を巡る違憲論議について

著者: 藤田宙靖
出版者: 第一法規
雑誌: 自治研究 (ISSN:02875209)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.92, no.2, pp.3-29, 2016-02

https://ci.nii.ac.jp/naid/40020721376

3 0 0 0 OA 「国政への関与」

著者: 藤田宙靖
出版者: 日本学士院
雑誌: 日本學士院紀要 (ISSN:03880036)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.74, no.1, pp.1-24, 2019 (Released:2019-10-16)

On August 8, 2016, the “Emperor's Statement Regarding His Majesty's Duty as the Symbol of the State”(henceforth, “The Statement”) was presented to the public. In 2017 the Japanese Diet enacted a special law (henceforth, “Special law”) that provided a legal exception to the Imperial Houshold Law, which allowed the abdication of the sitting Emperor at that time. At the end of April 2019, the now Emperor Emeritus abdicated the Chrysanthemum Throne, and on the next day, the current Emperor made His Majesty’s Accession. Just after “The Statement” was presented, a question was raised regarding whether such a Statement could be seen as giving rise to a conflict with the clause of the Constitution of Japan stating that “The Emperor…shall not have power related to government” (Art.4, Cl.1). During an interview by Asahi Shimbun I previously stated that “The Statement” needs not be deemed unconstitutional. I, however, suggested, that the reason why “The Statement” is not unconstitutional is, in fact, not so simple to answer and made clear that providing such reasoning would require a more precise, in-depth legal analysis. This article is the result of my theoretical research into the reason, why “The Statement” need not be deemed unconstitutional. It can not be denied that there was causal relationship between “The Statement” and the enactment of the special law regarding the Emperors abdication―causal in the sense, that if “The Statement” was not presented, the Special Law would not have been timely enacted to allow the Emperor Emeritus's abdication. On the other hand, recognition needs to be made that the contents of “The Statement”―itself, does not include any direct political appeal to the People. Instead, “The Statement” provided objective explanations regarding, among others, the following points: how His Majesty embraced the role as the “Symbol of the State” under the Constitution of Japan; and the anticipated future difficulties in fulfilling the Emperor's duties because of His Majesty’s advanced age. To this end, we can therefore say that―by presenting these explanations―the Emperor Emeritus actually fulfilled His Majesty’s responsibility as the “Symbol of the State”. Perhaps there may have been some levels of “guessing” by the People regarding the Emperor Emeritus's Inner Thoughts” and His Majesty's wishes to abdicate. But, especially in the case of Emperor Emeritus, what can not be said is that the abdication was realized via the Emperor's “authority” or the difference in the relative positioning of the Emperor to the People. And, on that note, we find that even the manner in which “The Statement” was presented did not create a conflict with the constitutional law.

2019-10-17 23:03:25
3 + 3 Twitter

2 0 0 0 OA 「裁判」とは何か?─最高裁の場合を中心として─

著者: 藤田宙靖
出版者: 日本臨床麻酔学会
雑誌: 日本臨床麻酔学会誌 (ISSN:02854945)
巻号頁・発行日: vol.33, no.7, pp.990-998, 2013 (Released:2013-12-14)
参考文献数: 5
被引用文献数: 2 1

訴訟法学上,古くから,「裁判(司法)は法の執行なのか,裁判が法を創るのか」ということが問われてきた.最高裁判事としての私の体験に照らせば,我が国の現行法制度下,裁判官の行動規範として期待され,また機能しているのは,「具体的な個々の紛争につき最も適正な解決を図る」ということであり,決して法律の厳密な適用や憲法・法の一般原理等の実現そのものが自己目的とされているわけではない.従来の最高裁判例の意義を正確に理解するためにも,この点についての理解は極めて重要である.