نوع مقاله : پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق عمومی، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
2 استادیار گروه حقوق عمومی، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
3 دانشیار گروه حقوق عمومی، دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
One of the most controversial legal and political issues in recent decades - especially since the 1990s - is the recognition of welfare rights in the constitutions of different countries and how to recognize them. Although it seems that most constitutions have recognized these rights, the status of them in the constitutions does not follow a single pattern, and unlike the first generation of rights, the very existence of these rights is seriously questionable. Despite the diminishing challenges at the international level, internal disagreements persist, and these rights continue to be criticized by various thinkers, especially right-wing thinkers. This issue has led to the inconsistent recognition of these rights in the constitutions of different countries. In this article, we seek to examine the models for identifying welfare rights in constitutions. Given the wide impact of the theories of various thinkers on the current state of these rights, it is necessary to examine the objections to them. The results of the research show that the general principle in identifying these rights is their acceptance as "aspirational goals" in the constitution, and their recognition as a "justiciable right" is an exception.
کلیدواژهها [English]