[問題] 這篇打臉文的真實性?
我仔細看過之後 又詢問了一些專業人士
得到的答覆大概是這樣
從第一篇就知道他只是要反對而已
=====================================
只是繞一繞口令讓你以為他講得好像也對
大法官的釋憲跟原文是一樣的
國際條約本來就要送到立法院審議
"審議"只是比較廣義的講法
事實上就是"審議""備查" (狹義上)
=====================================
只看憲法是不夠的 憲法還需要法律命令來補充其意義
有人拿憲法來解釋本來就會出很多問題
不曉得各位看法如何
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 61.231.80.71
推
03/24 08:27, , 1F
03/24 08:27, 1F
如果不是國際條約 代表我們跟中國是一體的
→
03/24 08:28, , 2F
03/24 08:28, 2F
→
03/24 08:28, , 3F
03/24 08:28, 3F
推
03/24 08:28, , 4F
03/24 08:28, 4F
→
03/24 08:29, , 5F
03/24 08:29, 5F
推
03/24 08:29, , 6F
03/24 08:29, 6F
噓
03/24 08:29, , 7F
03/24 08:29, 7F
抱歉
推
03/24 08:29, , 8F
03/24 08:29, 8F
→
03/24 08:30, , 9F
03/24 08:30, 9F
※ 編輯: wa007123456 來自: 61.231.80.71 (03/24 08:31)
噓
03/24 08:32, , 10F
03/24 08:32, 10F
→
03/24 08:35, , 11F
03/24 08:35, 11F
→
03/24 08:35, , 12F
03/24 08:35, 12F
→
03/24 08:36, , 13F
03/24 08:36, 13F
→
03/24 08:37, , 14F
03/24 08:37, 14F
→
03/24 08:40, , 15F
03/24 08:40, 15F
→
03/24 08:40, , 16F
03/24 08:40, 16F
→
03/24 08:41, , 17F
03/24 08:41, 17F
噓
03/24 08:43, , 18F
03/24 08:43, 18F
推
03/24 08:46, , 19F
03/24 08:46, 19F
推
03/24 08:48, , 20F
03/24 08:48, 20F
→
03/24 08:49, , 21F
03/24 08:49, 21F
→
03/24 08:49, , 22F
03/24 08:49, 22F
→
03/24 08:49, , 23F
03/24 08:49, 23F
→
03/24 08:50, , 24F
03/24 08:50, 24F
→
03/24 08:51, , 25F
03/24 08:51, 25F
→
03/24 08:51, , 26F
03/24 08:51, 26F
→
03/24 08:52, , 27F
03/24 08:52, 27F