Abstract

The article argues that over the years a series of gradual developments has taken place in the judicial review policies of Israel’s Supreme Court, whereby the Court expanded its ad hoc discretion in determining the constitutional limits that apply to primary legislation. Israeli constitutionalism has become judiciary-centered. The article suggests that judicial discretion that the Israeli Supreme Court tends to exercise in constitutional matters is of two types: substantive judicial discretion, which concerns the interpretation or application of the law; and adjudicative discretion, which includes both the discretion to deny in limine petitions in which the Court does not deem it necessary to grant relief according to considerations such as standing or delay; and the Court’s discretion in the manner of the hearing. The article suggests three illuminations of Israeli judiciary-centered constitutionalism: expenditure of the justices’ awareness of their discretion; the decline of the rules structuring judicial discretion; and a re-rise of the justices’ recognition of legitimacy of adjudicative discretion due to the expansion of substantive judicial discretion.

中文翻译：

---

以以色列司法为中心的宪政

摘要

文章认为，这些年来，以色列最高法院的司法审查政策发生了一系列渐进发展，由此法院扩大了其临时裁量权，以决定适用于主要立法的宪法限制。以色列宪政已成为司法中心。该条认为，以色列最高法院倾向于在宪法事务中行使的司法裁量权有两种类型：实质性司法裁量权，涉及法律的解释或适用；以及裁量权，其中包括拒绝给予丁胺的裁量权法院认为没有必要根据常任或延误等考虑给予救济的请愿书；以及法院在听证方式上的酌处权。文章提出了以以色列司法机构为中心的宪政的三个方面的启示：花费大法官的自由裁量权；构成司法自由裁量权的规则的下降；以及由于实质性司法裁量权的扩大，法官对司法裁量权合法性的认可度上升。