百家争鸣
[发表评论] [查看此文评论]    郭国汀律师专栏
[主页]->[百家争鸣]->[郭国汀律师专栏]->[One of the major writer whose legal thought Influence the Americas Founding Fathers ]
郭国汀律师专栏
·国际保护记者委员会哀悼吴湘湖记者
·BBC 英语新闻报导《冰点》被封事件
·国际保护记者委员会关注声援杨天水
·国际保护记者委员会谴责中共迫害记者李长青
·国际保护记者委员会呼吁立即无条件释放杨天水
·CPJ URGER MR.HU RELEASE JOURNALISTS IN CHINA
·Overcoming Violence Abroad and at Home
·Lawyers Sentence Tests IOCs Ability to Enforce Olympic Promises
·Free China Rally in Canberra,
·Open Letter to President Hu Jintao and Prime Minister Wen Jiabao from the Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong in China (CIPFG)
·非洲的复兴(African Renaissance)
***(56)大学日记
·错误是我犯的,但数十年后亲自纠错我还不伟大吗?!
·郭国汀 “只有社会主义才能救中国”质疑
·国家是民族矛盾不可调和的产物而非阶级斗争的产物/郭国汀
·阶级斗争的思考/郭国汀
·论干部制度/郭国汀
·无产阶级领袖有感/郭国汀
·学习与开放/郭国汀
·如何理解劳动?──有感于中国1956─1959年之“三大改造/郭国汀”
·时空畅想/郭国汀
·文革教训原因考/郭国汀
·对物质的思考/郭国汀
·精神文明与物质文明/郭国汀
·内因与外因关系的沉思
·外因是决定事物运动变化发展的根本原因
·开放党禁与多党联合政治
·论质、量互变关系
·如何理解劳动?——有感于中国1956—1959年之“三大改造”
·人类与自然环境
·共产主义是违背自然规律的妄想
***(57)网友评价评论与批评郭国汀
·一代大师
·良好的名誉是人们在任何时代任何社会安身立命之本
·各界人士对郭国汀律师高度评价
·浦志强、张思之大律师评价郭国汀
·清水君(黄金秋):我要特别感谢郭国汀大律师
·上海美女评价郭国汀律师
·欧阳小戎忆郭国汀律师
·不要迫害中国的脊梁 ──郭国汀
·良心律师,人权大侠!
·为国为民 侠之大者——郭国汀
·被缚的普罗米修司----
·感谢郭国汀律师
·让英雄的血流在光天化日之下
·声援中国人权律师郭国汀、强烈反对中共利用司法机器釜底抽薪镇压维权运动征集签名书
·谁是当代中国最高贵的人?
·答浦志强对郭国汀的批评
·警惕:中共对郭国汀律师的迫害并没有中止
·从郭国汀案看中国法制的崩毁
·值得大学生与爱国愤青一读的戏剧
·大中学生及爱国愤青的娱乐读物
·刘路与郭国汀之间的友情
·刘路(李建强)共特真相大暴露
·为什么说李建强(刘路)是共特?
·欢迎李建强公开辩污论战
·我与刘晓波先生的恩怨
·我与英雄警官之间的友谊
·律师为英雄辩护的最佳策略
·敬请张耀杰先生公开向郭国汀大律师赔礼道歉的公开函
·郭国汀训斥张耀杰
·怒斥张耀杰----南郭系当之无愧的大律师!
·痛斥張耀傑----予汝真诚道欠的最后通谍!
·郭国汀痛斥假冒伪劣人格低下的[学者]張耀傑
***周游列国 漂泊四海
·我的哥本哈根之旅
·梦幻湖畔之春晖
·加国白雪公主之宫
·雪中加国风情
·圣诞日维多利亚雪宫
·我的总统跑道
·我的超五星级总统跑道之二
·迷人的维多利亚风光
·维多利亚人间仙境
·海上明珠维多利亚精景
·世上最美的往往是大自然
·郭国汀在渥太华和世外桃源
·郭国汀律师在温哥华
·冬吟白雪诗
·山青水秀地灵人杰
·与传统观念彻底决裂?!
·文明与传统
·轻松愉快的国庆节游行
·我的巴黎之旅
·浪际天涯孤独客
·郭国汀律师在纽伦堡
·余之法朗克福之行
·吾之法朗克福之游
·感受纽伦堡
·观光德国古城堡
·纽伦古城堡风光依旧
·感受如诗如画的世外桃源美景
·观光布鲁塞尔
·风景如画的莱茵河畔
·郭国汀律师出席布鲁塞尔第二届全球支持亚洲民主化大会留影
·郭国汀律师在德国法郎克福
·郭国汀律师在德国法郎克福
[列出本栏目所有内容]
欢迎在此做广告
One of the major writer whose legal thought Influence the Americas Founding Fathers

   One of the major writer whose legal thought Influence the Americas Founding Fathers
   
   Author unknow
   Thomasgguo note
   

   We used to know only 17 to 18 century a group thought effect the America’s Founding Fathers, in fact, a 12 century British Justice, was the first major writers on the subject of English constitutional law and custom following Magna Carta was Henry Bracton.
   
   Bracton was born, lived and worked in Devon during the early 1200s (his birthdate unknown, he died in Exeter, in 1268). He was both a Cleric and a Justice - as indeed was common at that time, for few but the Clergy could read. From 1245 he was an Itinerant Justice for King Henry III, and from 1247 to 1257 was a Judge of the Coram Rege which later became the King's or Queen's Bench.
   
   His (Latin language) document On the Laws and Customs of England is one of the oldest systematic treatises on English Common Law. It also deals in depth with the obligations of, and disciplines upon Royal power, concentrating on three major themes: that the King should himself be subject to and act within the Law, that he should rule wisely and justly, and that he should rule in consultation with his peers(a member of any of five noble ranks, baron, viscount, earl, marquis and duke, who has the right to sit in the House of Lords), the "eminent men" of the land.
   
   The King must first of all be subject to, and act within the Law.
   
   In stressing the King's relationship with the law, Bracton identifies two aspects of law and the apparent contradiction between them. One aspect of law consists of orders and regulations, and in this sense the King is the source of law. The other aspect of law is the body of custom we would now call the Constitutional Framework; here the King must himself be subject to law, for the King and the very institution of Monarchy owe their existence to law in this Constitutional sense.
   
   So Bracton insists that "the King must be under God and under the Law, because the King's position owes its very existence to the wider framework of law.
   
   "Let him therefore in his Laws, observe the due process of law through which he himself exists. For the King is not fulfilling his legal obligations when he rules by personal will, rather than by due process of law under the ultimate will of God."
   
   Bracton also expects the King to obey his own laws, for the King, though the source of Law, is not outside the Law:
   
   "What the King is bound by virtue of his office to forbid to others, he ought not to do himself. Let him, therefore, temper his power by the due process of law, which is the discipline upon power, that he may live according to the Laws, for the Law of mankind has decreed that the lawgiver should be bound by his own Laws.
   
   "Nothing is more fitting for a Sovereign than to live by and within the laws, nor is there any greater sovereignty than to govern according to the due process of Law, and the Sovereign ought properly to yield to the tradition and process of Law that makes him King."
   
   Bracton strengthens his argument with this forceful reference to Christian example:
   
   "That the King must bow to the process and formality of law is parallelled in the example of Jesus Christ. Though many ways were open to Him to fulfil His destiny in the redemption(the action of redeeming or state of being redeemed; to buy or gain one’s freedom) of the Human race, He chose to destroy the devil's work, not through the arbitrary use of His great powers, but by subjecting Himself to the existing laws of justice. In this way He willed Himself to be under the law that He might redeem all those who must live under it. He chose to use not force, but judgement."
   
   Monarchs of England and Europe have often claimed to rule by Divine Right. The Kings themselves interpreted the concept of Divine Right as placing them above and beyond the reach - or reproach(blame;the expression of disapproval; disgrace) - of the law, and of those they ruled.
   
   Bracton however voices an earlier understanding of Rule by Divine Right, namely that the King is God's Minister, and as such is under obligation to rule wisely and responsibly:
   
   "The King is Vicar and Minister of God on Earth, and from God comes the power of justice. Therefore the King's power is that of justice, not injustice. The power of injustice is from the Devil, not from God.
   
   "The King will be the Minister of him whose work he performs. Therefore as long as he does justice he is the Vicar of the Eternal King, but he is the Devil's Minister when he deviates into injustice or injury.
   
   "The King is called King, not from reigning(to be the king or queen, without holding real power), but from ruling well, since he is a King as long as he rules well, but a tyrant when he oppresses by violent domination the people entrusted to his care."
   
   Bracton also stresses the requirement of participation in the formulation of laws:
   
   "The King should not propose or enact laws rashly by his own will or whim(a sudden idea or wish, often one that is not reasonable or sensible); the law should be properly decided with the counsel of his peers, the King giving it formal authority only after full joint deliberation(careful consideration; thorough examination of a matter) and consultation."
   
   Bracton thus set out the three major ideals of Constitutional Monarchy: that the King should himself be subject to and act within the Law, that he should rule wisely and justly, and that he should rule in consultation with his peers.
   
   The battle for consultation was won when Parliament gained supremacy(the state of being supreme) over the Monarch, and Britain became a Constitutional Monarchy.
   
   But now a new constitutional challenge would appear: the challenge of subjecting Parliament to constitutional discipline. Subsequent political development would attempt to ensure that, while Parliament would remain and grow as the institution of legislation and of popular representation, the power of Parliament itself should not become absolute, and Parliament should be subject to the same rules of underlying constitutional precedent which had previously been formulated to discipline Monarchs.
   
   This was the background from which America's Founding Fathers drew both fear and inspiration: fear of re-creating a new autocratic monarchy or presidency, and inspiration for the creation of a new kind of government, a government representing its people not dominating or oppressing them.
   
   Thomasgguo note: it is very clear that constitution is only the son of the idea of constitutionalism, thus the value and conception as well as the ideologies of constitution is vital important in constitutional government. Constitutional government is the only way to escape the autocracy and dictatorship regime

©Boxun News Network All Rights Reserved.
所有栏目和文章由作者或专栏管理员整理制作,均不代表博讯立场