论文部分内容阅读
1892年6月12日日本第三次帝国议会通过民法商法施行延期法律案,并不意味着旧民法延期问题就此定案。在明治宪法体制下,议会通过的法案尚需经政府上奏天皇裁可,方能具有法律效力。事实上,无论是在酝酿时期、还是法案通过之后,松方内阁中都有不顾议会决议、断行法典的强硬主张。尽管岌岌可危的松方内阁无力实施断行,但也始终未将法典延期案上奏天皇批准。此举为其继任者伊藤内阁赢得了重新考量法典问题的余地。伊藤内阁以明治元勋的政治影响力为后盾,在政府内部设立法典施行调查委员会,讨论法典是否需要延期,夺回了对法典命运的决定权。由于法典施行委员会在旧民法延期问题上难以达成统一,该问题仍必须由伊藤内阁以政治决断的方式作出决定。最终,在第四次帝国议会召开前夕,伊藤内阁将延期法案上奏天皇裁可。尽管旧民法最终延期,但不能将之简单视为政府消极遵循议会的主张,根本上还是伊藤内阁基于自身立场的考量。
June 12, 1892 Japan’s third imperial parliament passed the civil law commercial law extension of the law, does not mean that the issue of the extension of the old civil law finalized. Under the Meiji constitutional system, the bill passed by the parliament still needs the government to play the role of the emperor in order to have the force of law. In fact, no matter during the brewing period or after the passage of the bill, the cabinet in Songfang has a tough proposition that breaks the parliamentary resolution and breaks the code. Despite the inability of the precarious Songfang Cabinet to cut off lines, the extension of the Codex trial was never approved by the emperor. The move has won room for its successor, the Ito Cabinet, to reconsider the issue of Codex. The Ito Cabinet, backed by the political influence of the Meiji governor, set up a commission of inquiry within the government to discuss whether the code needs to be postponed and regained the power to make decisions about the fate of the Code. As the Codex Implementation Committee is difficult to reach an agreement on the extension of the old civil law, the issue must still be decided by the Ito Cabinet in a political decision. Finally, on the eve of the Fourth Imperial Parliamentary Assembly, the Ito Cabinet will delay the bill to play the Emperor’s decision. Although the old civil code was eventually postponed, it can not be simply regarded as the government’s passive adherence to the parliamentary claim, which is basically based on considerations of its own position.