|
Title
|
|
|
|
The practice of omnibus laws in Belgium: an empirical test
| |
|
Author
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
| It is a common practice for legislators all over the world to assemble a bulk of unrelated rules in one law to modify a whole range of existing statutes. Omnibus laws are often criticized, but the persistence with which they are used suggests substantial advantages. Procedural guarantees may secure these advantages while addressing the objections. This paper examines whether the procedural guarantees that were adopted in Belgium—one of the first countries to adopt omnibus laws—have proved effective safeguards for the democratic and legal quality of the law, both in fact and in the perception of advisors to and members of Parliament. To this end, the paper subdivides omnibus laws in different categories and develops indicators to find whether the use of omnibus laws in each category is still problematic. Subsequently, the paper examines whether possible problematic use is also identified by the advisors to and members of Parliament. The paper points out which measures have indeed led to improvement, and concludes that especially arrangement laws—i.e. omnibus laws with a budgetary purpose—remain most problematic and vulnerable for abuse. In the end, it takes a serious shift in political culture to make safeguards effective. |
| |
|
Language
|
|
|
|
English
| |
|
Source (book)
|
|
|
|
Comparative multidisciplinary perspectives on omnibus legislation / Bar-Siman-Tov, Ittai [edit.]
| |
|
Source (series)
|
|
|
|
Legisprudence Library ; 8
| |
|
Publication
|
|
|
|
Cham
:
Springer
,
2021
| |
|
ISBN
|
|
|
|
978-3-030-72747-5
| |
|
DOI
|
|
|
|
10.1007/978-3-030-72748-2_12
| |
|
Volume/pages
|
|
|
|
p. 283-313
| |
|
Full text (Publisher's DOI)
|
|
|
|
| |
|