Constitutional Rights in the Irish Home Rule Bill of 1893

In 1893, Prime Minister Gladstone introduced the second Irish home rule bill in parliament. The bill broke with tradition in Britain and the empire, as it included provisions from the bill of rights of the United States. Its significance was clear at the time: it was debated for nine days in the committee stage and, with one minor amendment, it remained part of the bill that passed the Commons. However, the bill was defeated in the Lords and, at least in the United Kingdom, bills of rights were dismissed as unnecessary or detrimental to sound governance until well after the second world war. This article therefore tries to understand how this early bill of rights was regarded at the time. Who suggested, or demanded, its inclusion? How did they expect it to be applied? And how did the debate reflect and influence thinking about constitutional law in Britain and the empire?     

论宪法权利的构造

宪法权利的构造方式有两种,一种是规则构造,一种是原则构造。规则是明确命令,它的应用形式是涵摄,而原则是最优化命令,权衡是它独有的运用方式。原则构造迄今引发了诸多反对意见,最为重要的是对权衡的理性的质疑。本文是对权衡理性的辩护。通过发现和证立隐藏在德国宪法诉讼中合比例审查背后的衡量公式,文章尝试证明权衡是理性的,原则理论就此有能力成为宪法权利的基础学说。     

A Non-positivistic Concept of Constitutional Rights

International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique - There are two fundamentally different conceptions of the nature of constitutional rights: a...     

Constitutional Rights and Social Welfare: A Comment on the Canadian Chaoulli Health Care Decision

Chaoulli v Quebec (A.G . ) may be the most controversial Supreme Court of Canada decision to date. The Court used social science evidence of foreign health care systems to justify its finding that a provincial ban on private health care insurance unjustifiably violated the right to security of the person. The decision could lead to fundamental structural changes in the way Canadian provinces deliver health care services. Given the importance of Charter jurisprudence in the United Kingdom, and recent debate about the wisdom of incorporating social rights, the case raises a number of pertinent issues for British lawyers. This comment advances two general arguments. First, that the case was wrongly decided because of its poor characterisation of the legislative objective of the ban, unprincipled approach to judicial deference, and poor treatment of expert and social science evidence. Second, far from justifying suspicion of constitutional social rights, the case illustrates precisely why such rights can make a positive difference.     

论非基本权利的宪法保护

以宪法文本是否加以列举作为基本权利与非基本权利的区分标准不利于宪法权利保护功能的实现,非基本权利与基本权利的二元划分未能准确揭示权利发展的动态过程。基于宪法权利保护的一体化原则,非基本权利亦应得到宪法的有效保护,宪法对非基本权利的保护具有必要性与可行性。非基本权利的宪法保护应当遵循最大限度保护原则和及时性原则,宪法解释和宪法修改是非基本权利宪法保护的可行途径。     

The Economics of the Bill of Rights

We elucidate, connect, and synthesize the literature that employseconomics to study the individual rights and freedoms protectedby the constitutional amendments comprising the Bill of Rights,especially as they relate to crime. Economics is uniquely suitedto studying decisions involving tradeoffs, and each of the amendmentsrequires tradeoffs. Emphasizing these tradeoffs allows us todiscuss the constitutional rights in terms of "more or less,"as opposed to taking an absolutist approach. We find that theeconomic literature on the amendments of the Bill of Rightsis vibrant and growing, and that viewing the amendments withinthe framework of economics is highly useful.     

宪法权利但书与宪法义务

宪法权利但书是对宪法权利的限制,宪法义务是制宪者(人民)要求自己对国家的义务(服从法律)。权利但书与义务在主体、所禁止侵犯的对象以及与权利的关系等方面均有所不同。宪法权利但书与宪法义务都是原则性的,并具有某种程度的重合性。各宪法权利但书形成了整个宪法权利的关系网。作为义务对他人的义务往往伴随着权利及其权利但书;对国家的义务则伴随着国家权力及其权力但书;宪法权利但书中的重要元素——"公共利益"与国家权力密切相关。     

宪法权利体系是怎样发展的?--以美国法为范例的展开:司法创制权利的保护

宪法基本权利是一个开放而非封闭的体系,得益于宪法文本之外权利的司法保护,主要包括人身与经济自由,是法官通过对第十四条修正案正当程序条款采用实质性正当程序的解释而完成的.通过适用不同的审查标准,法院徘徊于谦抑与能动之间.先例规则使司法承认的权利在个案中具有拘束力.美国政府与公众对法官创制非文本自由利益并未给予过多的怀疑,法官只是需要警惕防止在抵制一个专断的过程中形成新的专断.     

宪法基本权利的司法问题研究

本文讨论了中国理论界关于宪法基本权利直接法律效力的观点,论述了中国宪法关于基本权利之规定具有直接法律效力立法例的特点,结合人民法院审判实务适用宪法基本权利审判或者应当适用宪法基本权利审判的案例,提出了建立和完善人民法院直接适用宪法基本权利审判的重要性,法律依据、程序等方面的问题,以期促进和推动宪法基本权利的司法化进程。     

人权入宪的价值

什么是人权?对此人们看法各异,但国内外最广泛的共识是:人权就是人之作为人应当享有的权利.就主体而言,这里强调的标准是人,只看他或她是不是人,而不看他或她的其他方面特征,如所处社会制度、所属阶级、敌我分野等.1982年宪法经过第四次局部修改后,增加了"国家尊重和保障人权"的规定,这个规定构成现行宪法第33条第3款.     

基本权利限制的合宪性基准

尽管美、德两国违宪审查基准因各自的法律价值取向、权利保护政策和法律传统不同而有所区别,表述方式也存在差异,但各国从形式和实质上的考量因素是基本一致的。这些因素包括确立基本权利限制之合宪性基准的本体论因素,如基本权利的类型、构成;关联论因素,如法治传统、司法政策;以及方法论因素,如基本权利限制的目的、手段和结果等。希望所整合出的基本权利限制之合宪性的基准体系,对我国的立法合宪性审查有所助益。     

论基本权利的发展趋势

基本权利是宪法的核心和关键,是宪法的生命和价值所在,是宪法之所以成为根本法的原因.通过历史和实证分析,探讨近代宪法和现代宪法在确认和保障公民基本权利方面的若干发展趋势,即由自由权发展到社会权,由法律保障发展为宪法保障,由国内保障发展为国际保障.基本权利的这些发展趋势对我国的宪政制度建设提出了若干引人深思的问题.     

Towards a Northern Ireland Bill of Rights

The political settlement resulting from the Belfast Agreement recognisedthe fundamental importance of the issue of rights to a stable peace inNorthern Ireland. Indeed, the agreement provided for a Human RightsCommission, one of whose tasks is the drafting of a Bill of Rights thatwill reflect the political reality of the province. This paper arguesthat the proposed document will have to reflect an understanding ofrights and their protection resulting from the particular history ofNorthern Ireland. This specific understanding of rights appeared firstin the Anglo-Irish Agreement and has been gradually developed andconsolidated in the political agreements since. The planned NorthernIreland Bill of Rights will have to reflect this rights thinking. Thearticle also chronicles the recent work of the Northern Ireland HumanRights Commission in drafting the Bill of Rights to be presented to theSecretary of State for Northern Ireland in February 2002. Thereciprocal, if belated, moves in the Republic to set up its own humanrights commission will also be addressed as part of the process to drawup a Charter of Rights for the whole people of Ireland.