比较宪法视野下的人性尊严问题探究

人权作为人类的一项基本权利,在各个国家达到宪法中都将其放在重要地位。尤其是随着现代法律制度的不断完善,人们权利意识的提高,人性尊严越来越受到重视。人性尊严作为宪法的核心,它主要是为了更好的维护人的生存权利,从而让人获得精神上的享受,能够收到别人的尊重。本文从比较宪法视野下对人性尊严问题进行相应的探究,从而提升人们对人性尊严的认识,在今后的生活中能够尊重他人的人格尊严,增强宪法的权威性,促进我国人权更好的发展。     

论国家义务的价值基础

人性尊严是最高位阶的客观价值,是人类永远追求的目标。人性尊严之彰显,将促进生成民众合法性信念,达成普遍利益认同与共识,从而形成有普遍约束力的规范,成为最高判断标准与根本规范,是全体法规范价值体系的根源。人性尊严为国家义务提供了坚实的合法性与正当性基础,是国家义务的妥当性规范。     

法治与人性尊严——从实践到理论的反思

作为现代民主宪政社会不可或缺的生活形态,法治的意义及其核心价值,不论在具体法律实践或抽象理论阐述上,却依然存在着极大争议。"大法官会议"以人性尊严为本的法治观点,毋宁是一种"自由民主宪政秩序"的法治观点。无论是形式合法性或民主程序的法治要件,均无法在法治的具体实践上,保证执政者或立法者不会借助法治的形式要件,来追求满足其政治野心或个人私欲的不正当目的。法治理想的追求,应当着重法律实质内容的道德论证质量。就人性尊严的内涵来说,德沃金提出的两项人性尊严原则,内在价值原则与个人责任原则,确实是值得我们反思借镜的理论资源;特别是,他对人的内在价值的诠释,亦即人具有由自然与人类共同创造的神圣、不可侵犯的客观价值,适足以填补大法官人性尊严观的论述盲点。     

比例原则的理论基础探析——以宪政哲学与公法精神为视角

比例原则不是凭空而来的,其产生、发展都离不开一定的文化传统背景。作为一个公法上的原则,由于其探讨的是国家权力与公民权利的关系,而国家权力与公民权利之间的关系是宪政哲学乃至公法哲学的基础,因此,比例原则是立基于宪政基础之上的。此外,在现代公法体系中,法治原则、宪政思想的确立及人性尊严、基本权利保护的确立,成为现代公法精神的载体,是公法追求的内在价值,这些也为比例原则提供了坚实的法精神基础。     

人性尊严:程序法制岂能无视?

一、程序法制之人性尊严的内涵(一)人性尊严的涵义在人性尊严范畴中,涉及两个基本的概念:一是人;二是尊严。讨论展开之前首先从这两个名词开始进行分析。人是法律主体的一种称谓,在法学上人包括个人(自然人)与法人两种形式。法人乃法律拟制之人格,无人性而言,故人性尊严的人专指个人,是剔除了身份、能力、信仰等外在条件的每一个具体的个人,而不是集体的人、联合的人。以下论述中所用人民一词是在此意义上的个人观念之集合。尊严二字并非明确的定义,罗马人认为尊严乃是个人在公众中的声誉,尊严的获得基于个人为社会作出贡献。基督教将尊严理解为神的恩赐,因为神创造了人。     

对当前农民流动问题的思考与对策分析

大规模的农民流动是我国社会转型期一个特有的社会现象,当前农民流动引起了整个社会结构的变化,对中国社会发展产生了广泛影响。本文主要从农村、城市和农民自身三个方面来分析当前农民流动存在的问题,并对农民流动问题提供一些政策应对和建议。     

浅析当前失控村的农民政治参与

农民政治参与的扩大是伴随国家政治制度化、现代化的一个重要现象,这种现象在失控村表现的尤其明显,因而显现出其研究的价值。本文简要分析了引发当前农村失控村的农民政治参与的原因、特点、影响并提出了相应的对策。     

出于营救目的的酷刑与正当防卫——战后德国最具争议之刑法问题评析

出于营救目的的酷刑是否应当被合法化,是近年来德国刑法和宪法学界最大的热点问题之一.本文以正当防卫为切入点,对德国学界就该问题的讨论进行了系统的梳理和分析.文章认为,正当防卫应当受到宪法规范,尤其是宪法中最基本的价值决定的限制.由于不论是出于对被害人的生命权还是对其人性尊严的保护,都不能使得营救酷刑对行为人人性尊严的损害在宪法上合法化.因此,营救酷刑也不能被认定为正当防卫而构成刑法中的违法阻却事由.这一结论也是综合考虑国际公约相关规定和民主法治国基本特性的必然结果.     

民法视野下的人体法益构造——以人体物性的科技利用为背景

近现代民法体系所持的"人体为主体人格之一部"的立场系建立在传统人物两分理论基础之上,该理论虽有助于彰显人的主体价值和尊严,但在处理因人的活体、尸体、离体组织和基因的科技利用所生法律问题上,已显现出部分失灵和易加剧人体物性利用与人性尊严保障之间价值冲突的不足。人与物或人格与财产的区分并非绝对不容许因应时代变迁而作必要修正。通过逻辑的、价值的、实践的和法释义学的综合考量,理论上可以得出,有限地承认人体为物,并将"人体财产权"和人类作为物种享有的"类的人性尊严"纳入到人体法益构造体系之中,能较好地克服以上不足。在以公序良俗原则限制人体或其一部的利用和处分时,应建立和实践"人性尊严关联度原则"。     

论人的尊严的行政法保障

本文以维护人性尊严是行政法保护的主要目标出发,站在行政诉讼的视角,阐述了人的尊严的涵义以及维护人权落实到实处的权利救济的几种建议。     

论农民宪法权利平等保护目标——实质平等

农民宪法权利平等保护是尊重和保障人权的内在要求。农民宪法权利要受到与市民平等地对待和保护,这种平等应当不仅是形式上的而且是实质上的。农民宪法权利平等保护存在诸多的现实困境与认识误区,制约了农民宪法权利的真正实现。农民宪法权利平等保护目标应是建立在形式平等基础之上的实质平等。这一目标的提出具有正当性和现实性,也契合平等理论、人权理论及其普遍实践的趋势。农民宪法权利实质平等的保护目标及其路径选择是改变城乡二元结构,构建社会主义新农村,解决三农问题的实现之道。     

Protecting mental health clients' dignity — The importance of legal control

Protecting human beings' dignity is a fundamental value underlying the UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as several recommendations and conventions derived from this, among them the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), a declaration that also takes precedence over Norwegian legislation. Still, clients' stories inform us that their dignity is not always protected in the mental health service systems.The aim of the study has been to investigate violations of dignity considered from the clients' points of view, and to suggest actions that may ensure that practice is brought in line with human rights values.The method used has been a qualitative content analysis of 335 client narratives.The conclusion is that mental health clients experience infringements that cannot be explained without reference to their status as clients in a system which, based on judgments from medical experts, has a legitimate right to ignore clients' voices as well as their fundamental human rights. The main focus of this discussion is the role of the ECHR and the European Court of Human Rights as instruments for protecting mental health clients' human rights. To bring about changes, recommendations and practices should be harmonized with the new UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006). Under this convention, the European Court of Human Rights has support for the application of the ECHR without exemptions for special groups of people.     

基本权利规范的正当程序价值——兼议行政程序法如何保障基本权利

我国宪法中的基本权利规范具有丰富的正当程序价值,行政程序法的制定,需通过宪法解释的方法挖掘基本权利规范的程序价值,使之得到行政程序法的保障。基本权利条款的设置从整体上表征国家与公民之间的平等关系,这种平等关系要求行政程序法建构起交互式的行政程序,吸纳公众有效参与行政过程。人格尊严既包含个别的权利,又是概括的"人权",表征公开、公正的价值,需要行政程序法通过建构回避制度、禁止单方接触制度、职能分离制度和公开制度予以保障。     

Human Dignity in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and its Interpretation Before the European Court of Justice

This article argues that the EU Charter’s dignity provisions must be given a specific, expansive European meaning that underpins the importance the EU places on fundamental rights protection as a principle EU value. To this end, the article examines the EU Charter provisions on dignity and critically analyses the case law before the EU Charter had full legal effect and after it did. It finishes with looking at three areas in which the potential for an expansive interpretation of dignity could help bring the EU closer to its people and fully respect and protect dignity: asylum, criminal justice and sexual orientation.     

社会权概念界定之批判与重塑

当前学界对社会权概念的界定,主要存在"内涵—价值分析"、"外延—规范分析"两种路径。虽然以上分析具有逻辑上的内在关联,但它们都没有完整揭示出社会权概念的本质特征。社会权作为一项基本人权,主要立基于对尊严与平等以及社会经济领域公民适当生活水准的价值追求。国家义务作为界定社会权内涵的重要工具性指标,其分别涵括尊重、保护和给付三种义务类型,但在逻辑上,尊重和保护义务只是给付义务的逻辑衍生。在外延上,社会权并非意指《经济、社会及文化权利国际公约》所规定的各项经济、社会和文化权利。受国情因素制约,各国宪法对于社会权的规定并非整齐划一。我国宪法层面上的社会权主要包括适当生活水准权、劳动权、获得物质帮助权以及受教育权等。     

Dignity, Democracy, Civilisation

This paper contributes to international discussion about the difficulty of defining human dignity as a legal concept by locating it at the heart of (European) democracy and human rights. Focusing on emerging dignity case law in the United Kingdom, the paper explores the connections among dignity, human rights and democracy, and the uses of dignity to enhance and refine democracy. While judges are key actors in the construction of dignity, they operate within the boundaries of a particular democratic ‘civilisation’ anchored in the core prohibitions of art 2, 3 and 4 European Convention on Human Rights, combined with those of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (art. 2, 3, 4 and 5). This normative core, the paper argues, is to be understood in the wider time frame of democracy and dignity, which is equally important for refining and thickening human dignity’s conceptual and normative definition, as well as for reflecting on the legitimacy of its (judicial) uses.     

Human Dignity as a Form of Life: Notes on Its Foundations and Meaning in Institutional Morality

In normative terms, human dignity usually implies two consequences: (a) human beings cannot be treated in some particular ways due to their condition as humans; and (b) some forms of life do not correspond to the ideal life of our community. This study consists in discussing the meaning of this idea of human dignity in contrast to the concept of humiliation in the context of institutional, i.e. political and legal, rights. Two concepts of human dignity will be discussed. The first absolute/necessary and formal/transcendental concept implies the proposition “because human beings have dignity, the following cluster of rights is valid”. Conversely, the second contingent and material concept corresponds to the thought “for being able to live in dignity, we must respect the following rights”. This paper claims that human dignity should be understood as the right to be protected from humiliation. Humiliation is the situation of incapacity or absence of self-determination.

     

Human Flourishing, Human Dignity, and Human Rights

Rather than treating them as discrete and incommensurable ideas, we sketch some connections between human flourishing and human dignity, and link them to human rights. We contend that the metaphor of flourishing provides an illuminating aspirational framework for thinking about human development and obligations, and that the idea of human dignity is a critical element within that discussion. We conclude with some suggestions as to how these conceptions of human dignity and human flourishing might underpin and inform appeals to human rights.     

论患者权利类型

患者权利类型的确定是构建患者权利保护体系的理论基础，应分为两大类：患者作为“人”在医疗领域所享有的个体权利和作为“公共卫生体系使用人”的集体权利。前者是患者在接受医疗服务过程中基本人权的实现，包括人格尊严权、不受歧视的权利、私生活和秘密被尊重的权利、生命健康权、获得有质量的医疗服务的权利等。后者则包括患者群体通过自己的社团——患者组织——在卫生法规决策过程中的介入权、在卫生机构中的代表权、在卫生监督部门中的参与权等等，与国家公权力机关共同实现卫生领域的民主，以构建和谐的医患关系及促进医疗水平提高。在现有立法、司法及理论对患者个人权利已逐步承认并加强保障的情况下，认识患者集体权利的实现具有更强的理论意义及实践价值。     

德沃金个人主义权利观的论述逻辑及其反思

德沃金的权利理论是一种个人主义权利观,"诠释"与"人性尊严"是其中的两个关键词。"诠释"确定了权利的表现形式,权利表现为一种个体性的诠释实践;"人性尊严"则赋予权利以价值,权利的价值在于它承认与尊重每一个人的内在价值与责任。《认真对待权利》、《法律帝国》与《刺猬正义》这三部著作代表了德沃金权利理论的三个发展阶段,权利的个人主义观念在此过程中得以形成与完善。该权利观虽然极为精致且具有说服力,但并非理解权利的唯一可能路径。