Ambivalent Legal Mobilization: Perceptions of Justice and the Use of the Tutela in Colombia

This article explores the relationship between legal consciousness and legal mobilization in the context of constitutional rights in Colombia. Citizens report extremely low confidence in the state and the judiciary, yet hundreds of thousands of Colombians make constitutional rights claims through the acción de tutela procedure each year. Why does profound skepticism of the ability of the judiciary to provide justice and fair treatment seem to coexist with high levels of use of the legal system? How do perspectives on rights and the legal system relate to observed mobilization of the law? Drawing on 74 interviews and an original 310‐person survey, this article develops legal consciousness theory, identifying the specific beliefs that encourage or discourage individuals to turn to the courts to make claims to their rights. In the Colombian case, understandings of law and the state encourage the use of the tutela procedure, not due to the realizable promise of the state to protect rights or the majestic power of the law, but because the tutela is understood to be the only mechanism through which citizens can access their rights. In other words, citizens turn to the courts because there is no other alternative.     

论文化权利的宪法保护

公民的文化权利与公民所享有的政治、经济和社会权利一样,都是公民作为国家和社会主人翁所必须享有的法律利益。我国是社会主义国家,保护公民权利是社会主义事业一贯的宗旨。从宪法角度来保障公民的文化权利,最主要的是应当加强相关的制度建设。应当在宪法文本中明确文化权利的基本权利宪法地位,明确国家和政府在保障文化权利方面应当承担的职责或义务,加强对文化权利的平等性的保护以及应当制定文化基本法律,来保障文化权利的实现真正做到有法可依。     

诉权入宪:构建和谐社会的宪政之道

诉权是公民的基本权利,是公民人权的重要内容,是公民获得司法救济、实现权利的前提和基础。基于诉权启动的司法审判程序是保障人权实现的最有效的机制。从宪政的角度把握诉权的宪法权利属性,站在构建和谐社会的高度认识诉权入宪作为宪政实现策略的实践意义,必须首先在宪法中明确规定诉权,提升诉权的保障水平,并通过诉讼法和实体法对诉权加以具体化和规范化,完善诉权的宪政保障体系。     

Normative Acts of the Council of Ministers of a Union Republic in the System for Implementing the Constitutional Rights of Citizens

There are various approaches in the Soviet legal literature to study of the mechanism for implementing the constitutional rights of citizens, each of which focuses on some important aspects of it. But study of the activity of specific state agencies, particularly the council of ministers of a union republic, with regard to securing the basic rights of citizens requires a more thorough examination of this mechanism. First, three of its component parts must be distinguished: the mechanism for guaranteeing rights, which is a precondition if constitutional rights are to have any substance; the mechanism for their direct implementation, i.e., the de facto practical application of these rights; and the mechanism of safeguarding these rights, which comes into play when basic rights are violated and which is aimed at restoring them and eliminating the causes and conditions of their violation.     

预防性行政诉讼

现行行政诉讼法规定的事后救济型行政诉讼,常常无法排除或修复行政活动对原告造成的严重损害后果,导致原告合法权益得不到有效保护,直接威胁到行政诉讼救济的有效性和社会稳定与和谐。应尽快弥补这个法律缺失,建立以事前和事中救济为特征,旨在对抗威胁性行政行为和事实行为的预防性行政诉讼制度,真正实现权利有效保障。     

Constitutional literacy in Africa: challenges and prospects

The issue of constitutional literacy has attracted very little attention in scholarship on constitutionalism in Africa. This is not surprising, because the early constitutions were virtually imposed by the departing colonial powers and perceived as alien, not only by the ordinary citizens but also the new leaders, who had little knowledge or experience of constitutional governance. Have the new generation of ‘made-in-Africa’ constitutions changed the state of constitutional literacy on the continent? In addressing this question, the paper examines the concept of constitutional literacy and, using the example of South Africa, considers ways in which it could be promoted. The paper also considers the challenges to promoting constitutional literacy. It concludes by underlining the fact that strengthening the democratic constitutional foundations laid in the 1990s, foundations increasingly under threat today, requires a comprehensive programme of constitutional education, with a focus on the poor and other marginalised groups in society. Without knowledge and awareness of constitutional rights, citizens will not be able to vindicate their rights or challenge any violation of them.     

论法院对基本权利的保护

为公民基本权利提供保护,是现代国家合法性的重要来源。普通法院在基本权利保护中发挥着重要作用。德国虽然设立了宪法法院,但保护公民基本权利的职责仍主要由其他法院承担。在没有设立宪法法院的国家,通过普通法院更是为基本权利提供司法保护的唯一途径。我国法院应当通过三种方式为基本权利提供司法保护:如果法律有保护基本权利的具体规定,法院应当直接适用法律;如果法律对基本权利的保护只作了抽象规定,法院应当对有关抽象立法进行合宪解释之后予以适用;如果法律没有作出保护基本权利的任何规定,法院可以直接适用宪法的基本权利条款。     

论宪法中人民主权与基本人权原则的沟通——以哈贝马斯的宪法有效性理论为视角

在宪法原则中，人民主权是逻辑起点，基本人权是终极目标。人民主权表征了国家权力的合法性，基本人权保证了权利的不可侵犯性。但在传统的理论中二者存在着何者优先的张力。哈贝马斯的宪法有效性理论认为，包括宪法在内的法律形成于公民的自我理解，是主体之间商谈的结果，宪法的承受者同时也是法律规则的创造者。宪法中的人权与人民主权原则是同源的，是互为前提、相互证成的；人权使得人民主权的合法行使成为可能，人民主权在法律上的制度化是人权本身的要求。因此，宪法人民主权原则与基本人权原则之间的紧张可以通过宪法的有效性而沟通。     

The Constitutional State in the Political Philosophy of Johannes Althusius

The central questions of this article are: a) Based on what arguments defended Johannes Althusius the distinction between the private and public life sphere? b) What kind of relationships exist between the state on the one hand, and private and other public associations on the other hand? c) Based on what arguments may the government restrict actions of citizens and private associations? Answering these questions leads to the conclusion that Althusius should be mentioned as one of the founding fathers of the liberal constitutional state.     

我国宪制发展中短期态势评估

我国宪法确立了国家的基础性制度架构,内容包括若干基本宪法原则、公民宪法权利的范围及其保护、国家权力的横向和纵向配置,以及宪法的保障实施。我国宪制发展面对的课题可概括为以下几种:使政治、法律体制改革跟上经济体制改革的步伐;有效保障宪法确认的公民基本权利;实现执政党与国家关系的法治化;形成独立的有权威的司法体系;建立行之有效的违宪审查制度。我国完全可以在今后5-10年内实现一些具体的宪制改革目标,其中包括:初步实现政党以及执政党与国家机关关系的法制化;省、自治区、直辖市人大代表乃至全国人大代表由选民直选产生;修改选举法,容许人大代表选举实行竞选;实现不同职业选民的平等选举权;使司法机关相对于本级地方党委和本级地方其他国家机关有较大独立性;采取立法措施弥补公民基本权利法律保障方面的缺失;消除地方因权力过度集中于执政党的领导机构而形成的党的书记破坏法制、搞个人专制的问题;在全国人大内部设立宪法监督委员会作为设立宪法法院前的过渡措施;逐步终止地方国家机关正职领导人员选举和补选环节普遍违反法律原则的做法。     

论宪法实施的统一技术方案——以德国、美国为分析样本

宪法规范原则性强、技术含量高,宪法问题非传统法律分析法所能解决。当今宪法实施存在两大技术方案:德国公式与美国公式。虽然两大公式均具有一定的操作性、规范性,但也存在审查原则不完备、审查基准不周延、审查结果不确定等缺陷,因此有必要在整合德国公式与美国公式的基础上,创立一个全新的统一公式。该公式的基本内涵为:(1)针对自由权、社会权与平等权,建构一个解决宪法问题的二元技术路径,亦即自由权、社会权的保障路线图与平等权的保障路线图。(2)自由权、社会权的保障路线图为三步骤分析法:权利保障范围的厘清;基本权利侵害的确认;违宪阻却事由的分析。(3)平等权的保障路线图为两步骤分析法:差别待遇的厘清;差别待遇的合宪性检验。(4)在美国的三重审查基准、德国的三层级审查密度的基础上,创立一个更具有周延性的五重审查基准,亦即明显性审查基准、合理性审查基准、中度审查基准、严格审查基准及绝对审查基准。     

Terms of service and bills of rights: new mechanisms of constitutionalisation in the social media environment?

ABSTRACT

From a cursory look at the terms of service of the main social networking websites, it is immediately possible to detect that Facebook’s show a peculiar configuration. Although they represent a mere contract between private parties, these terms adopt the traditional jargon of constitutional texts and articulate their contents in terms of rights, principles and duties. This curious pairing between norms regulating social media and the constitutional sphere is also apparent in a series of non-binding documents that are unequivocally named ‘bill of rights’ and seek to articulate a set of principles to protect social media users. This paper examines whether the emergence of a constitutional tone in this limited number of texts could be related to the effective, or aspirational, constitutional function that these documents exercise. The identification of a series of significant shortcomings will lead to exclude that social media’s terms of service and bills of rights of social media users currently play a constitutionalising role. Nevertheless, the possibility to theoretically justify the use of these documents as mechanisms of constitutionalisation in the social media environment will be adduced as an evidence of the potential constitutional aspirations of these texts.     

The Indeterminacy of an Emergency: Challenges to Criminal Jurisdiction in Constitutional Democracy

In this contribution I address the type of emergency that threatens a state’s monopoly of violence, meaning that the state’s competence to provide citizens with elementary security is challenged. The question is, whether actions taken by the state to ward off these threats (should) fall within the ambit of the criminal law. A central problem is the indeterminacy that is inherent in the state of emergency, implicating that adequate measures as well as constitutional constraints to be imposed on such measures cannot easily be determined in advance. This indeterminacy raises two interrelated issues. Firstly, the issue of whether it makes sense to speak of criminal jurisdiction when the existing jurisdiction is challenged as such. To what extent does the indeterminacy call for inherently unlimited powers of the state, implying there can be no such thing as criminal jurisdiction during a state of emergency? Second—if criminal jurisdiction is not in contradiction with the state of emergency—the issue of what criminal liability could mean in such a state needs to be confronted. To what extent does the indeterminacy inherent in the state of emergency jeopardise criminal liability because such indeterminacy engenders severe legal uncertainty regarding the standards against which the relevant actions are to be judged? Both issues will be discussed from the perspective of constitutional democracy, assuming that what is at stake in times of emergency is both the competence to sustain the monopoly of violence and the possibility to constrain the powers of the state.     

宪政视野下检察行为的规范与创新——以刑事诉讼参与人权利保障为视角

宪政的设计和运行程序集中表现为权利保障与权力控制二者之间的张力。宪政与检察行为的内在逻辑在于人权保障,宪政的基调决定着检察行为的品质。在宪政环境下,检察机关应当充分履行法律监督职责,以保障人权为终极价值,通过规范、创新检察行为,避免对公民个体权利的侵犯,最大限度地保障各刑事诉讼参与人的合法权益。     

论社会保障基本权

社会保障基本权是指公民所享有的依照宪法请求国家等公共主体提供援助以保障其基本生活或提高生活水平的基础性权利,它可被区分为缴纳性权利和非缴纳性权利、给付性权利和非给付性权利.由于社会保障基本权以维护人道主义价值为目标,并倚重于国家等公共机构,所以,它是一种社会基本权.不同社会保障基本权的实现对普通法的依赖程度有差别,但是,它们都具有对国家机关、社会组织及公民的直接效力.如果社会保障基本权未能被立法权、行政权具体化,或者具体化地不充分,或者具体化行为违宪,一旦该权利受到侵害,那么,就可通过宪法诉讼予以救济.     

The 2013 CLSR-LSPI seminar on electronic identity: The global challenge – Presented at the 8th International Conference on Legal,Security and Privacy issues in IT Law (LSPI) November 11–15, 2013, Tilleke & Gibbins International Ltd., Bangkok,Thailand

We are the middle of a global identity crisis. New notions of identity are made possible in the online world where people eagerly share their personal data and leave ‘digital footprints’. Multiple, partial identities emerge distributed across cyberspace divorced from the physical person. The representation of personal characteristics in data sets, together with developing technologies and systems for identity management, in turn change how we are identified. Trustworthy means of electronic identification is now a key issue for business, governments and individuals in the fight against online identity crime. Yet, along with the increasing economic value of digital identity, there are also risks of identity misuse by organisations that mine large data sets for commercial purposes and in some cases by governments. Data proliferation and the non-transparency of processing practices make it impossible for the individual to track and police their use. Potential risks encompass not only threats to our privacy, but also knowledge-engineering that can falsify digital profiles attributed to us with harmful consequences. This panel session will address some of the big challenges around identity in the digital age and what they mean for policy and law (its regulation and protection). Questions for discussion include: What does identity mean today? What types of legal solutions are fit for purpose to protect modern identity interests? What rights, obligations and responsibilities should be associated with our digital identities? Should identity management be regulated and who should be held liable and for what? What should be the role of private and public sectors in identity assurance schemes? What are the global drivers of identity policies? How can due process be ensured where automated technologies affect the rights and concerns of citizens? How can individuals be more empowered to control their identity data and give informed consent to its use? How are biometrics and location-tracking devices used in body surveillance changing the identity landscape?     

国际法人本化趋向下海外中国公民保护的性质演进及进路选择

全球化背景下中国公民走出国门的人数越来越多,他们在国外面临的形势不容乐观,而如何保护其权益则是我国必须思考的问题。国际法人本化趋向下保护海外中国公民权益不仅是国家的一项权利,更是一项义务和责任。目前,我国在保护海外公民权益实践当中还存在诸多不足,因而有必要在我国实行外交为民、执政为民的理念下进一步完善海外公民权益保护的策略,以切实保护其权益不受它国的非法侵害。     

宪法的哲学之维

宪法是用以调整公民与国家之间冲突的法律规范。权力和权利的关系协调问题贯穿于宪法的始终,二者的有机协调是宪政秩序得以型构的前提基础。公民与国家的这样一种冲突关系,表现在宪法中,就是限权与保权的关系。它作为宪法的调整对象,表现出双重的属性:立足于已然之冲突,宪法应着重于矫正;立足于未然之冲突,宪法应着重于规制。矫正与规制的关系及其解决,成为宪法哲学的基本问题。宪法哲学的一切命题都由此展开,并为此服务。     

What Does Free Movement Mean in Theory and Practice in an Enlarged EU?

Abstract The purpose of this article is to review the main challenges to the principle of free movement of persons in theory and practice in an enlarged European Union. The right to move freely represents one of the fundamental freedoms of the internal market as well as an essential political element of the package of rights linked to the very status of EU citizenship. The scope ratione personae and the current state of the principle of free movement of persons is assessed by looking at the most recent case law of the Court of Justice and the recently adopted Directive on the rights of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States. But what are the hidden and visible obstacles to free movement of persons in Europe? How can these barriers be overcome to make free movement and residence rights more inclusive? This article addresses these issues along with the following questions: Who are the beneficiaries of the free movement of persons in an enlarged Europe? What is the impact of the recent legal developments in the freedom of movement dimension, such as the European Court of Justice case law and the new Directive? And to what extent are pro‐security policies such as the Schengen Information System II and an enhanced interoperability between European databases fully compatible with the freedom of movement paradigm?     

'Solange, chapter 3': Constitutional Courts in Central Europe—Democracy—European Union

Abstract: Soon after the accession of eight post‐communist states from Central and Eastern Europe to the EU, the constitutional courts of some of these countries questioned the principle of supremacy of EU law over national constitutional systems, on the basis of their being the guardians of national standards of protection of human rights and of democratic principles. In doing so, they entered into the well‐known pattern of behaviour favoured by a number of constitutional courts of the ‘older Europe’, which is called a ‘Solange story’ for the purposes of this article. But this resistance is ridden with paradoxes, the most important of which is a democracy paradox: while accession to the EU was supposed to be the most stable guarantee for human rights and democracy in post‐communist states, how can the supremacy of EU law be now resisted on these very grounds? It is argued that the sources of these constitutional courts’ adherence to the ‘Solange’ pattern are primarily domestic, and that it is a way of strengthening their position vis‐à‐vis other national political actors, especially at a time when the role and independence of those courts face serious domestic challenges.