美国人权的历史和现实

当前,人权已成为国际社会普遍关注的一个问题。而人权状况的发展受到各国历史、社会、经济、文化等条件的制约,是一个历史发展过程.观察一个同家的人权状况,不能割断该国的历史,不能脱离该国的国情。基于这样的认识,本文打算从两个方面探讨一下美国人权的历史和现状。从《独立宣言》到《人权法案》众所周知,美国独立前是英国的殖民地.美国对北美殖民地实行残酷的压迫和剥削,使它完全成为宗主国的附庸。在英国统治下,殖民地的经济完全服从于宗主国的利益。在英国殖民者对北美殖民     

1998年《人权法案》及其对英国宪法的影响

人权是一个必然的、永恒的、但却是历史的概念 ;换言之 ,是一个永远随着人类社会进步而发展的认识理性。中国人在追寻宣扬人权的同时 ,西方人也在做着类似的努力。李树忠之文至少可以给我们提供以下几方面的思考与启示 :第一 ,英国的“宪法性”规则同样是其法治实践的结果 ,且长久地存在和体现于法治实践中 ,在此情况下 ,英国人是如何实现了人权保护呢 ?其政治条件和法治机制是如何对此发生作用呢 ?第二 ,1 998年《人权法案》进入英国法治实践 ,在何种程度上发生了影响 ?它对英国的政治体制和法治机制能够带来什么样的变化 ?第三 ,《人权法案》的精神与权利宣示究竟有什么样的实质性效力 ,它与国内的公共权力、司法操作以及人权文化会发生何种联系 ?所有这些均可从此文中获取一、二信息与观点的传达。英国宪制之独特及其走入世界大流之状况 ,亦可由此知之点滴而激发自察 ,是故以首篇荐之读者     

人权的推定与推行——米尔恩人权观点评述

本文评述了英国学者米尔恩的下列人权观点:其一,《世界人权宣言》将西方人权充作世界人权,其实,从西方人权概念中推导不出世界人权概念,不存在超社会、超文化的人权;其二,应该从最低限度的道德里推导出低度人权,进而推导出普遍人权,这种权利推定方法不同于自然法理论;其三,推行人权要依靠法治,分权政治和商品经济本身并不能保障人权,人权不是解决社会问题的根本手段。作者认为,米尔恩的观点是“相对主义”和“绝对主义”的调和,它反映了英国的权利推定传统,有助于全面了解西方不同派别的人权思潮。     

衡平法地产权:对人权到对世权之蝶变

产生于中世纪的英国衡平法地产权是英国财产法极具特色的制度安排。衡平法地产权经历了从对人权到对世权的演变之路:起初,衡平法法院在承认受托人普通法地产权人权利的基础上赋予衡平法权益人对受托人请求交付地产收益的相对性的权利,后来衡平法权益人的利益可以对抗除支付合理对价且善意受领普通法地产的第三人以外的任何人,成为真正对世权意义上的地产权。了解衡平法地产权之演变可以了解对人权与对世权对话与沟通,有助于各种财产权的权利性质的分析与把握。     

也谈米尔恩之低限人权——兼评《浅析米尔恩的低限人权》

谈到人权，不得不提的就是这位英国著名的人权哲学家米尔恩。在米尔恩所著的《人的权利与人的多样性——人权哲学》一书中,提出了一些独到的人权见解，发人深省。本文试图理清米尔恩的逻辑思路，尽可能地展示出低限人权理论的魅力，也从中提出一些笔者认为的疑惑之处。     

从《残疾人权利公约》反思国际人权机制

2007年3月起开放签字的《残疾人权利公约》是联合国体系在保护人权领域的最新努力。与以往的多数人权条约一样,《残疾人权利公约》列举了具体权利、构划了报告体制,同时通过任择议定书设计建立一套来文制度。这意味着在国际人权法上又添加了一套体制。虽然从权利保护发展本身看,这一公约的出现丰富了联合国体系的人权保护内容,但是从国际法治的理念上看,它是国际法不成体系的特征的继续与延伸,本质上不仅无益于国际法治的完善,而且有可能进一步提高国际法维护人权各个环节的成本。现阶段有必要考虑将包括人权、环境等领域的规范进行编纂,将相应机构进行整合,以推进国际法治的目标。     

批准人权公约与切实保障人权不能等同——以美国法院对一项国际人权公约的适用为例证

美国联邦法院在审理有关主张违反了《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的案件时既考虑相关的程序问题,也考虑实质问题。但是大量案件的结论都显示该公约对美国法院没有拘束力。那些根据该公约主张权利的当事人,他们想通过美国法院执行权利的愿望常常遭到拒绝。由是观之,从批准人权公约到实现人权,其间还有相当长的距离。     

冤假错案与人权保护

一、免受司法迫害是最基本的人权人的生命、安全和自由是最基本的人权。这些权利得不到有效保障 ,其他权利就无从谈起。对这些基本人权的侵犯 ,主要来自两个方面 :一方面来自个人的暴力 ;一方面来自国家有组织的非法暴力。后者主要是因司法权的专横和滥用而产生的冤假错案。近代社会宪法发展的历史 ,就是关于人权保障的历史 ,首先就是反对司法专横和司法权滥用的历史 ,是从制度上防止产生冤案、争取正当司法程序保障的历史。第一个宪制国家———英国１２１５年颁布的第一个宪法文件《大宪章》第３９条规定 ,任何自由人 ,若未经其同级贵族依…     

知识产权与人权的关联辨析——对"知识产权属于基本人权"观点的质疑

本文对"知识产权是基本人权"的观点提出质疑,分析讨论国际人权文书与知识产权有关的规定和有关国家宪法文本中关于人权与知识产权的表述.本文研究其中所规定的知识产权的权利性质,认定《世界人权宣言》第27条和1966年《经济、社会和文化权利国际公约》第15条所规定的权利在性质上是(作为文化权利的)对知识财产的人权,它不同于作为财产权的知识产权.     

论人权司法保障

人权在西方和中国都有古老的渊源.西方人权来自平等和公正的理念,中国人权来自于权利的概念.中国近代史上人权的法律规定曾经达到世界领先水平,基本包括联合国于1948年制定的《世界人权宣言》和1966年制定的《民权公约》中的大部分权利,在内容上和时间上,中国人权都领先世界半个世纪.而且,联合国制定《世界人权宣言》时,中国人还作出了巨大贡献.“司法”有三种含义,人权司法保障是国家的义务,具有国际和国内标准.诉讼是个人的权利,包括刑事诉讼、民事诉讼和行政诉讼.诉讼人权保障是人权司法保障的最主要的方式.诉讼权利的完善是法治进步的标志,国家有义务保障个人的诉讼权利.     

The Myth of Universality: The UNESCO “Philosophers’ Committee” and the Making of Human Rights

This article reexamines one of the most enduring questions in the history of human rights: the question of human rights universality. By the end of the first decade after the end of the Cold War, debates around the legitimacy and origins of human rights took on new urgency, as human rights emerged as an increasingly influential rubric in international law, transnational development policy, social activism, and ethical discourse. At stake in these debates was the fundamental status of human rights. Based in part on new archival research, this article offers an alternative interpretation of the rediscovery by scholars in the late 1990s of a 1947 UNESCO survey that purported to demonstrate the universality of human rights through empirical evidence. The article argues that this contested intellectual history reflects the enduring importance of the “myth of universality”—a key cultural narrative that we continue to use to find meaning across the long, dark night of history.     

论我国学术自由的宪法基础

《中华人民共和国宪法》第47条规定的科学研究自由,目前被学者们诠释为文化权利或者文化权利的组成部分,而文化权利这一范畴不仅被我国宪法学者指称宪法第47条规定的自由,还被人权法学者用来解读国际人权法中的有关权利,并且具有内涵模糊、外延不确定、宪法规定与国际人权法的规定不一致的特点,弱化了科学研究自由的独立价值和功能。笔者认为,我国宪法中规定的科学研究自由,在外国宪法中多规定为学术自由或学问自由,因此可以吸收和移植域外宪法学理论关于学术自由的诠释资源,来丰富我国科学研究自由的权利内涵。遵循宪法解释学的路径,运用基本权利的客观价值秩序理论,可以架起科学研究自由通往我国高等教育制度的桥梁,以科学研究自由为宪法基石构筑我国现代大学法制,从根本上破解我国高等教育"行政化"的顽疾。     

The impact of international human rights norms—a “law undergoing evolution”

Abstract

In this paper, the author outlines the history of, and reasons for, the growing impact of international human rights jurisprudence upon the work of judges in New Zealand, Australia, England and elsewhere in the Commonwealth of Nations. Formerly, international and domestic law were virtually entirely separate. But now, there is increasing legal authority to support the use of international human rights jurisprudence in domestic judicial decision‐making. It can be done in the application of constitutional or statutory provisions reflecting universal principles stated in international treaties. But, according to the Bangalore Principles, it can also be done where there is a gap in the common law or where a local statute is ambiguous. The judge may then fill the gap or resolve the ambiguity by reference to international human rights jurisprudence which will ensure that domestic law conforms, as far as possible, to such principles.

In its decision in Tavita, the New Zealand Court of Appeal declared this to be “a law … undergoing evolution”. The author outlines some of the impediments and problems for the evolution. But he also collects the reasons why it is a natural and inevitable phase of the common law in the current age. He suggests that judges should be aware of the developments. In appropriate cases, they should inform their decisions with relevant international human rights jurisprudence. That will at least ensure that they develop domestic human rights law in a principled way, consistently with international law, and not in an idiosyncratic fashion “discovering” new fundamental rights which may otherwise be criticised as mere judicial invention.     

身份权的客体

学界对于身份权客体的研究不多,大致有三种说法,本文作者对这三种说法进行了评价,并从分析人身权的客体出发,提出了自己的看法,认为身份权的客体是身份权相对人的人身。     

When Women's Rights are Not Human Rights – the Non‐ Performativity of the Human Rights of Victims of Domestic Abuse within English Family Law

A large proportion of child contact cases in England take place within a context of domestic abuse and significant risks to victims and their childrenq associated with post separation contact. The legal response has largely been inadequate and the potential impact of human rights law by the family courts has yet to be fully explored. This paper analyses an exploratory empirical research project undertaken in 2017/2018 with Women's Aid England and 72 victims of domestic abuse regarding their experiences of human rights law in the family courts. The results, theorised through the lens of performativity and against the context of international human rights law, reveal a high level of non‐ performativity with respect to the human rights of the participants. The paper concludes with recommendations and the implications the analysis holds for feminist organisations if they are to fully realise the human rights of the victims of domestic abuse.     

论英国土地保有关系对债作为财产所有权客体的影响

英国法上,财产所有权的客体不是有体物而是财产利益。英国法财产所有权客体的形成有其特定的历史原因,土地保有关系的产生是英国法财产权客体定位为财产利益的根本原因,土地保有关系模式下的这种立法思想深深影响了英国所有权客体理论。在英国法上,任何具有独占排他的财产利益均可以成为所有权的客体,因合同等原因而产生的债属于债权人的财产利益,因此英国法将其作为所有权的客体。英国法明确区分因合同产生的债的所有权以及合同权利本身,英国法的债权的二分理论值得我国学界研究。     

The Caribbean Court of Justice and the Legal Profession: Promoting a Caribbean Jurisprudence*

The author submits that the main purpose in the establishment of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is to promote the development of a Caribbean jurisprudence, based on the Commonwealth Caribbean's common historic, political, economic and cultural experiences and mutual history.

The article examines the role of final appellate courts, noting that judges of such courts must often choose between alternatives which are perfectly capable of being defended as rational, reasonable and consistent with ‘the law’. Factors such as life experiences, socialisation, and backgrounds all play a role in determining the choices that are ultimately made. This is why, the author underscores that ‘it is so important to have a diverse Bench, to have Judges from different backgrounds’.

For judges to come close to steering the right course they must have an understanding of the society that gives rise to the legal disputes. They must be grounded in that society. In this respect, the author argues, it is remarkable that the evolution of certain landmark judgments relating to human rights, particularly capital punishment, have been rendered by British judges, sitting and residing in England.

The article, which draws on a wealth of jurisprudence, proceeds to examine the original jurisdiction of the CCJ and the role of the Bar in defending the integrity of the Court and the justice system as well as in enhancing the quality of judgments.

Finally, it emphasises the need to promote Caribbean jurisprudence and access to local judgments. In this regard, it is lamented that many truly outstanding judgments of Caribbean judges do not receive the recognition they should because, if there is an appeal, they become almost automatically buried beneath the judgments of the higher court.     

Human rights and HIV/AIDS in the context of 3 by 5: time for new directions?

Over the last decade, the success of the human rights-based approach to HIV/AIDS has been spotty, says Mark Heywood. In this feature article, the author describes the challenges that remain in implementing a human rights approach. He presents an analysis of questions raised by De Cock et al concerning the applicability of the human rights approach. The author argues that human rights advocacy needs to continue, but that new directions are required. The article outlines new directions in the areas of (a) confidentiality and openness, (b) HIV testing, and (c) health systems. The author concludes that the most serious threat to human rights remains the unwillingness of national governments to take all necessary measures to build health services and prevent epidemics.     

权利冲突逻辑结构的理论思辩——以权利冲突界定的“靶式结构”为视角

权利冲突已成为学界研究的热点问题,而对权利冲突的界定则是进行研究的首要前提.针对国内法学界无限扩大权利冲突形式的界定思路,应先从"权利冲突"的语义分析入手来揭示其本身的意蕴,在此基础上,再以由强式、次强以及弱式意义上的权利冲突构成的"靶式结构"为视角来廓清权利冲突的逻辑结构,最终明确,相关法学研究应以对关涉法定权利的权利冲突的研究为重心.