General theoretical analysis of the law-making error
Journal Title: Lex portus - Year 2018, Vol 11, Issue 3
Abstract
The article studies the legal nature of the lawmaking error, which is a negative result of the norm-setting activity, which leads to the appearance of shortcomings in the current legislation. Discussed questions of the concept and the main features of the error in the law-making activity are considered, and the necessity of applying the legal responsibility of the subjects for the results of their erroneous work is substantiated. In the legal literature, the causes of law-making errors are reduced to two main groups: objective and subjective. The objective reasons include, in particular, the dynamism and variety of social relations, the complexity of the actual law-making activity and the like. The range of subjective reasons for law-making errors is much broader: non-compliance with the rules of law-making technology in the adoption of regulatory legal acts, imperfection of the system of inventory of regulatory and legal acts, haste in reviewing and adopting regulations and non-compliance with established procedures for their adoption, inadequate level of legal culture and legal awareness of society in general, and more. To disclose the legal nature of law-making errors, their differentiation into separate species is important. In the legal literature various considerations are expressed regarding the classification of law-making errors. Since law-making mistakes are allowed both in the process of law-making activity and in its results - the sources of law, it seems optimal to divide up errors in law-making activities and errors in its results. An important criterion for differentiating law-making errors in the results of law-making activity (sources of law) is the technical and technological requirements imposed on the relevant source of law. The comprehensive clarification at the theoretical level of the essence and legal nature of the lawmaking error can serve as a basis for further formalizing this phenomenon at the legislative level both for the purpose of improving the law-making process and also serve as one of the grounds for suspending or canceling, acts.
Authors and Affiliations
Елена Миневич, Olena Minevich, Олена Міневич
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP344973
- DOI 10.26886/2524-101X.3.2018.15
- Views 81
- Downloads 0
Правовий зміст принципу субсидіарності в умовах євроінтеграції України
У статті досліджено складові принципу субсидіарності та чинників, що зумовлюють його використання у практиці публічного управління, досліджено спорідненість та взаємозалежність при його застосуванні з іншими принципами д...
Концептуальные основы реализации принципа субсидиарности в Украине
В статье исследованы концептуальные основы реализации принципа субсидиарности в Украине. Сегодня принцип субсидиарности является главным признаком взаимодействия всех уровней власти в Европе. В частности, это определено...
Визначення транзитивної юстиції: наукові дебати та практика ООН
В статті розглядається виникнення та розвиток поняття транзитивної юстиції в науковій думці та практиці ООН. Простежуються історичні передумови зародження цього поняття, виявляються джерела його виникнення та розвитку. Д...
To a question of a definition of objects of printing detection
The criminalistic science in its specific subject has a number of provisions, the development of which assumes adaptation of modern achievements of other branch sciences, in particular – natural. The priority of search o...
Modern forms of management of sea ports and problems of administration of marine industry in Ukraine
Port industry plays one of key roles the economy of Ukraine. Sea ports are component part of a transport and productive infrastructure of the state and taking into account their location play key role as a “Sea Gates” to...