基本法的功能性与开放性及其启示——《联邦德国宪法纲要》读后

站在魏玛宪法肩上的德国基本法,在总统的宪法地位、宪法的守护者等方面吸取了魏玛宪法的失败教训,并使权利规范成为其核心规范。黑塞教授的《联邦德国宪法纲要》从功能性和开放性两个方面把基本法解析得入木三分。他认为,宪法的首要任务就是为国家构建一种功能性的政治统一体,而宪法如果试图将各种历史变迁情形下的问题都解决的话,就必须在内容上保持“向时代开放”。德国基本法的功能性与开放性可以说为我国的宪法改革指明了方向,而黑塞的这本宪法学教科书亦为我国宪法学的发展提供了宝贵的教义学路径,即注重分析宪法文本的功能性和开放性。     

The Genesis of the Austrian Model of Constitutional Review of Legislation

Abstract The European model of the constitutional review of legislation, characterized by the concentration of the constitutional review power in a single constitutional court, had its origin in the Austrian Federal Constitution of 1920. This is all the more remarkable when one considers that this Constitution established at the same time a parliamentary system of government in a fairly radical form. As the author explains, this “invention” of a constitutional court is attributable to two factors. One factor is the federal aspect. The Court was conceived by the framers of the Austrian Federal Constitution of 1920 as an umpire between federal legislation and the legislation of the states or Länder. In this respect it was meant as a substitute for the principle of the priority of federal law over state or Land law. This is manifest in the initial draft of the Constitution, where actions on questions of the constitutionality of legislation could only be brought by the Federal government (against the legislation of one or another of the states or Länder) and by the State or Land governments (against federal legislation). Right from the beginning, however, the Court could examine a parliamentary act ex officio when it had to apply such an act in another proceeding. It was this power of the Court that triggered the development of constitutional review. Its exercise gradually transformed the Court into a guardian of the Constitution as a whole, in particular, the fundamental rights of citizens. The author traces this development in the context of the concept of state and law that prevailed in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. This concept included specific restrictions on constitutional review. On the basis of a different understanding of the functions of a constitution, the Court gave up these restrictions and followed the examples of the European Court of Human Rights, the German Constitutional Court and—indirectly—the American Supreme Court.     

Does Europe Need a Constitution? Demos,Telos and the German Maastricht Decision

Abstract: Through a close reading of the Maastricht Decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court Weiler examines critically the so-called No-Demos Thesis according to which the absence of a European Demos precludes democratisation of the Union at the European level and requires the mediation of Member State institutions. He traces the roots of this thesis to Carl Schmitt and argues that it represents a failure of the Court to understand the Union in terms different from the Schmittian strand in German constitutional theory. He claims, inter alia, that the No Demos thesis is premised on an organic understanding of peoplehood deriving from the European Nation-State tradition which conflates nationality and citizenship and can, as a result, conceive of Demos only in statal terms. Weiler first presents an alternative view of the Union and of supranationalism and then offers a non organic view of Demos and argues for a ‘European’ notion of membership in which each individual would belong to multiple demoi defined in different ways.     

All Bark and No Bite: Notes on the Federal Constitutional Court's 'Banana Decision'

The Federal Constitutional Court's banana decision of 7 June 2000 continues the complex theme of national fundamental‐rights control over Community law. Whereas in the ‘Solange II’ decision (BVerfGE 73, 339) the Federal Constitutional Court had lowered its standard of review to the general guarantee of the constitutionally mandatorily required minimum, the Maastricht judgment (BVerfGE 89, 155) had raised doubts as to the continued validity of this case law. In the banana decision, which was based on the submission of the EC banana market regulation by the Frankfurt‐am‐Main administrative court for constitutional review, the Federal Constitutional Court has now confirmed the ‘Solange II’decision and restrictively specified the admissibility conditions for constitutional review of Community law as follows. Constitutional complaints and judicial applications for review of European legislation alleging fundamental‐rights infringements are inadmissible unless they show that the development of European law including Court of Justice case law has since the ‘Solange II’ decision generally fallen below the mandatorily required fundamental‐rights standard of the Basic Law in a given field. This would require a comprehensive comparison of European and national fundamental‐rights protection. This paper criticises this formula as being logically problematic and scarcely compatible with the Basic Law. Starting from the position that national constitutional courts active even in European matters should be among the essential vertical ‘checks and balances’ in the European multi‐level system, a practical alternative to the Federal Constitutional Court's retreat is developed. This involves at the first stage a submission by the Federal Constitutional Court to the Court of Justice, something that in the banana case might have taken up questions on the method of fundamental‐rights review and the internal Community effect of WTO dispute settlement decisions. Should national constitutional identity not be upheld even by this, then at a second stage, as ultima ratio taking recourse to general international law, the call is made for the decision of constitutional conflicts by an independent mediating body.     

The Legacy of the Maastricht-Urteil and the Pluralist Movement

Abstract:  The Maastricht-Urteil of the German Constitutional Court of October 1993 has left a deep mark on EU law. Although some may consider it as part of legal history, the decision has never been overruled, and the ideas behind it are very much alive. This article tries to examine the legacy of that decision. From a practical point of view, the article focuses on the following issues: the current situation in Germany; the influence on other constitutional or supreme courts and on constitutional reforms in some Member States; the influence on the European Court of Justice and on the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. Regarding theory, three sections of the article discuss a number of widespread ' idées reçues ' contained in the Maastricht-Urteil on notions such as the state, constituent power ( pouvoir constituant ), and democracy. The next section presents the movement of legal pluralism as an attempt to come to terms with the Maastricht-Urteil and its legacy. It criticises the radical versions of legal pluralism in view of the damage they may cause to essential dimensions of the rule of law. The final section reflects on the real motives behind the Maastricht-Urteil and its legacy, and on possible future developments.     

Text Matters: Some Reflections on the Forging of a New Constitutional Jurisprudence in South Africa

The South African Constitution establishes a constitutional democracy with a strong form of constitutional review. The Constitutional Court is required to declare invalid any legislation or conduct of the President which is inconsistent with the Constitution. The author, a former judge of the Constitutional Court, argues that the text of the Constitution has been an important determinant of the Court's jurisprudence, both in relation to the Court's jurisprudence concerning the institutional structures established by the Constitution and its Bill of Rights jurisprudence.     

The decision of the Italian Constitutional Court on numerus clausus: A matter for Community law

This article discusses the recent decision of the Italian Constitutional Court on the numerus clausus issue, containing the first relevant pronouncement by the highest jurisdiction on the constitutional legality of the measures adopted so far by the Ministry. The Constitutional Court considers these measures in conformity with the Constitution to the extent that they implement Community law, and especially certain directives on the recognition of qualifications. Thus, Community law is deemed to provide the proper legal framework to adopt certain regulations, amongst which restrictions to access. This article argues that, in the context of litigation on access to university, Community law has been used improperly and that, in any event, a convenient solution to the issue could have been found in national law. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

An Exercise in Legal Honesty: Rewriting the Court of Justice and the Bundesverfassungsgericht

This article contains an urgent plea for the re‐establishment of legal honesty in Europe. European law is a victim of European economic crisis. The emergence of the concept of conditionality within national and European jurisprudence, or the judicial imposition of a market discipline upon national budgets, is also a part of a chronicle foretold given in the face of the volatile power of international finance markets. Yet, in rewriting the judgements given by the Court of Justice in the case of Thomas Pringle and by the German Constitutional Court in its matching jurisprudence on the European Stability Mechanism, this article seeks to overcome the destruction of constitutionality within Europe, the foreclosure of a European space for the politics of alternatives and the condemning of individual Europeans to lasting suffering within a perpetual austerity regime.     

The influence of the rulings of the Constitutional Court on the development of health law in Lithuania

This article highlights some recent developments in the constitutional doctrine of the right to health care in Lithuania, and more in particular the impact of the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Lithuania on the development of health law. The right to health care, enshrined in the Constitution, is both an obligation of the state and an individual right. The Constitutional Court has developed a doctrine of the right to health care, as well a doctrine of certain other constitutional social rights, which is based on the understanding of the close interrelation between the different constitutional rights, the principle of indivisibility and equal importance of these rights, and the presumption of justiciability of social rights. The analysis is based on the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court. Two cases on the disputes of the legal regulation concerning the pharmaceutical activities are presented in more detail.     

The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Austria 1918–1920

Abstract.   Constitutional review was the most original idea stemming from the Austrian Federal Constitution of 1920. It is argued that the politician Karl Renner gave birth to the idea of a constitutional court. Hans Kelsen played the predominant role in the drafting of constitutional provisions. The new Constitutional Court provided for a centralized system of review, with an eye to a number of politically important issues. Owing to the pressure that stemmed from various discussions between and among the politicians of the national state and the Länder , Kelsen was obliged to depart from the German model of the federal state and to develop in its place a new theory.     

宪法的稳定性与稳定性的宪法——以中美宪法文本的比较为视角

宪法的稳定性既是维持宪政秩序有效运行的基础,也是宪法作为根本法的原则性和作为法律的规范性的具体要求。美国宪法具有较强的特定性,它是通过民众对宪法精神的敬畏与信仰,以及宪法文本的独特品质与最高法院的宪法解释等途径实现的。探索《美国宪法》稳定性的深层背景,检讨我国《宪法》文本的缺失与不足,对于我们如何处理宪法的稳定性与适应性的关系,完善我国的宪法解释与宪法修改制度,都具有十分重要的借鉴意义。     

从形式主义的刑罚概念到实质主义的刑罚概念——评欧洲人权法院2009年M诉德国案判决

欧洲人权法院2009年M诉德国案判决的主要争议在于德国刑法上的保安监督是否为一种刑罚以及保安监督是否具有溯及既往的效力。对此，德国联邦宪法法院和德国政府坚持形式主义的刑罚概念，认为保安监督只是德国刑法上的一种保安处分措施，而不是一种刑罚；与此不同，欧洲人权法院则主张实质主义的刑罚概念，认为德国刑法上的保安监督无异于一种刑罚。这两种不同的刑罚概念背后是国家主义与自由主义之间的对立。从实质主义的刑罚概念出发，我国的劳动教养制度就不只是一种单纯的行政措施而是一种刑罚，因此有珏要将其纳入刑法的规制之中。     

The Splendors and Miseries of Constitutional Reasoning in Times of Global Crisis: A Critical Look from the Realist Perspectives of Semiotics

The European Stability Mechanism (ESM) is the rescue fund that may grant loans to struggling euro zone governments by issuing bonds, collectively by the euro zone members. The implementation of the ESM spawned a lot of legal challenges brought to higher judicial authority in Ireland, Austria, Estonia, Germany and Poland. In the fall of 2012 the ESM was subject to legal analysis in the Estonian National Court, the German Constitutional Court, and in the European Court of Justice. Delivering much anticipated rulings in legal challenges to the legal provisions establishing the ESM, courts avoided upsetting the complex arrangements in question by producing legal decision of direct political import and letting EU bailout measures go forward. In looking over different critical responses, we have seen an argument raised by media and legal scholars, according to which courts’ capitulation before the power of financial markets in the EMS rulings represents “a sign of judicial crisis” that marks the weakness of modern European jurisprudence. In light of their importance, we undertake a preliminary semiotic analysis of the ESM rulings of the Estonian National Court, the German Constitutional Court, and in the European Court of Justice. Our analysis aims at discerning the crucial aspects of those rulings is performed on the basis of different semiotic methodologies combined with the refined ideas of the Scandinavian analytical school of the doctrinal study of law. In traditional legal studies there seems to be a taken for granted assumption that there is one analytical way to dissect judicial reasoning of the supreme courts. This paper argues that the manner of analyzing the constitutional reasoning needs to be congruent with the particular research methodology.     

“索拉娅案”评注——德国民法中对损害一般人格权的非物质损害的金钱赔偿

德国《民法典》对损害一般人格权的非物质损害的赔偿并没有进行规定,它是德国法中一项典型的判例法制度。联邦宪法法院通过“索拉娅案”的判决,确认了以往的审判实践和学说所建立的“一般人格权”法律制度的基本原则。通过对该判决书内容的研究,即可了解这一制度在德国发展的历史、当前的基本形态以及未来的趋势。     

法治原则在中国宪法文本中的嬗变

法治原则作为世界多数国家宪法所普遍贯穿的一项基本原则,在我国历部宪法文本中经历了由法制到法治的发展演变。现行宪法对法治原则的规定表现为直接和间接两种方式。而法治原则在宪法文本中的价值可区分为宪法文本内和宪法文本外两个层面：在宪法文本内,法治原则是协调统一宪法规则的标尺和确立宪法权威的依据;在宪法文本外,法治原则要求规范和控制国家公权力的运行,保障人权与公民权的实现。     

Lord Cooke of Thorndon (1926–2006): 51 Years in the Law

This article provides an in‐depth analysis of the landmark ‘cash for query’ judgment of the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court of India. The scope of parliamentary privileges in India, as well as in England and America, is examined, particularly with respect to the jurisdiction of the courts. The present position in the law of parliamentary privileges in India was laid down in the case of Raja Ram Pal v The Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha, &; Ors. The Supreme Court of India has extensively dwelled on the matter and has delivered a judgment, which is by far the most comprehensive decision in this field of law. The author notes in the analysis that the difference between the English and Indian constitutional systems is of crucial significance. The conflicts between the judiciary and parliament in England arose because of the sovereignty of parliament, and the judiciary had to fight for every inch of its jurisdiction in England. The judiciary had to contend with Parliament not only as a legislative body, but also by virtue of being the ‘High Court of Parliament’, as a superior court. Because of these reasons, the case law from British constitutional history does not have strict applicability in India. The decision of the Supreme Court of India in Raja Ram Pal v The Hon’ble Speaker, Lok Sabha, &; Ors, is a clear expression of a very basic feature of the Indian constitutional mechanism: where the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and all governmental organs, which owe their origin to the Constitution and derive their powers from its provisions, must function within its framework.     

Political constitutionalism in Europe revisited

This article traces the disconnect in the constitutional study of the European Union from the Maastricht era to the euro crisis. In the Maastricht era, a discourse of ‘post-sovereignty’ came to dominate theoretical enquiry, reflecting but also distorting a number of material developments: the ‘end of history’, the retreat of critical theory into discourse analysis and systems theory, and the prioritization of law over politics. Jürgen Habermas was a key intellectual figure in driving this ideological mix at the very moment when anti-systemic challenges began to return, both formally and informally, as exemplified in the German Constitutional Court and the French political scene. In revisiting the idea of political constitutionalism, we can foreground this constitutional disconnect and show how it contributes to the irresolution of the subsequent euro crisis conjuncture.     

National Constitutional Jurisprudence in a Post‐National Europe: The ESM Ruling of the German Federal Constitutional Court and the Disavowal of Conflict

In its pending decision on the constitutionality of the European Stability Mechanism and Fiscal Compact, the German Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has recently ruled on several applications for temporary injunctions against the transposition of these instruments. The problem of democratic self‐determination under the constraints of monetary integration has been a main concern in the ruling. Yet, the democracy‐safeguards the FCC has prescribed are parochial in not considering their impact on other EU Member States, and the Court's view of autonomy is skewed towards the issue of spending. Both concepts are at odds with the current level of transnational interdependence, which the FCC as relay to ‘integration by stealth’ has facilitated during two decades of EU‐jurisprudence. Constitutional jurisdiction should acknowledge its role in this state of affairs and fortify its effort in building judicial networks of deliberative exchange to overcome outworn parochialisms.     

Balancing Fundamental Rights and Common Market Freedoms in Union Law: Schmidberger and Omega in the Light of the European Constitution

Abstract:  This article deals with how the Court of Justice balances fundamental rights protection and Common Market freedoms. From the particular perspective of the Charter and the ECHR, whose legal status will be upgraded upon entry into force of the European Constitution, it studies the Court of Justice's approach to fundamental rights invocations by Member States in the context of Common Market freedoms. For this purpose the judgments in Schmidberger and Omega will be discussed both in the current setting and that envisioned by the European Constitution. It will emerge that the Court of Justice's reasoning in Schmidberger and Omega can be criticised on different levels, and alternative approaches are proposed. At a later stage some further elements for refining the methodology for assessing Member States' fundamental rights invocations are addressed with a view to facilitating the Court of Justice more satisfactorily to take account of the current and likely future setting of fundamental rights protection in Union law.     

On the Role of Normative Hierarchies in Constitutional Reasoning: A Survey of Some Paradigmatic Cases

This article examines the role of normative hierarchies in constitutional argumentation. A threefold distinction between formal, material, and axiological hierarchy is employed. The correlative concepts of formal validity, material validity, and applicability are also briefly described. Within this framework, four cases are analysed: Decisions 1146/1988 and 10/2010 of the Italian Constitutional Court, and Kadi I and Opinion 2/2013 of the Court of Justice of the European Union. As a result, it is argued that axiological hierarchies are frequently used to reshape certain fundamental legal arrangements, namely, the hierarchy of sources (Decision 1146/1988 and Kadi), competence clauses (Decision 10/2010), and interpretive methodologies (Opinion 2/13).