傲慢与权利:法律如何处理人的尊严问题

近期通过网络引起社会轰动的诸案件,其关键皆在于尊严冲突。尊严冲突是导致几乎所有纠纷的基本原因。法律处理尊严冲突时存在两个基本标准:普遍的可接受性和双方的可接受性,调解机制在维护双方尊严上有利有弊。法律处理尊严冲突的有效性条件在于存在社会共通价值并在个案中具备灵活性。网络媒体的兴起加剧了处理冲突的难度,也提供了有利的契机。     

Pride and Right: the Law how to Deal with the Issue of Human Dignity

近期通过网络引起社会轰动的诸案件,其关键皆在于尊严冲突.尊严冲突是导致几乎所有纠纷的基本原因.法律处理尊严冲突时存在两个基本标准:普遍的可接受性和双方的可接受性,调解机制在维护双方尊严上有利有弊.法律处理尊严冲突的有效性条件在于存在社会共通价值并在个案中具备灵活性.网络媒体的兴起加剧了处理冲突的难度,也提供了有利的契机.     

Observations on the Development of Human Dignity and Personality in German Constitutional Law: An Overview

This paper provides an overview of the development of the constitutional value of human dignity under German constitutional law. First, it provides a background to the German constitutional order then it places the constitutional value of dignity within the framework of the constitutional court’s jurisprudence on personality rights. It then progresses to an examination of specific cases that have developed personality rights and the importance of the constitutional court’s interpretation of personality and dignity in the personal and outer spheres within the framework of the German legal order. The article concludes with some observations and comparisons between German and American law in this area.     

水人权:人权法上的水权

离开了水,人类无法生存.因此,水人权是一项基本人权.这已经为国际法充分承认.国家有义务尽可能利用其现有资源实施水人权.尽管水人权属于经济、社会及文化权利的范畴,是国家应当采取措施逐步充分实现的人权,但国家也负有一定的立即履行的义务.然而,在国家层面上,包括我国在内的多数国家存在一个需要解决的共同问题,即缺乏系统、有效的规定和保护.     

German Constitutional Law in the UK Supreme Court

Liverpool Law Review - The outgoing tide of EU law will be Britain’s most significant constitutional change in recent times. In an era of uncertainties, the UK Supreme Court proved to be a...     

法律的根本目的在于保障人的尊严

人的尊严表征着人是主体、目的,而非工具、手段,拥有不可侵犯与不可剥夺的尊严,是法律主体概念得以成立的基础。就现代社会而言,法律的根本目的即在于保障人的尊严的实现,人的精神性存在的特质,决定了体面而有尊严的生活为人们的根本追求。在保障人的尊严得以实施的路径上,必须从立法、执法、司法、守法等各个层面,来保障人的尊严得以存立的根基。     

Between Procedural Impermeability and Constitutional Openness: The Italian Constitutional Court and Preliminary References to the European Court of Justice

On 15 April 2008, the Italian Constitutional Court (ICC) raised for the first time a preliminary question to the European Court of Justice (ECJ). This decision (see judgment No 102/2008 and order No 103/2008) represented a turning point in the ICC's case‐law, and calls for a careful assessment of the motives backing such revirement as well as of the legal reasoning that the Italian judges used to wrap it up without repudiating their previous case‐law. In addition to this preliminary analysis, the aim of this essay is to explore two themes: i) the developments of the ICC's case‐law as regards the role of Community Law and the ECJ, and ii) the appraisal of the interplay between the ICC and the ECJ in the light of the notion of ‘interpretive competition’.     

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。     

日本宪法上的知情权与信息公开法

对日本信息公开法上的知情权的宪法依据,日本法学界认识不一致.一些学者认为宪法第21条规定的"表现的自由"等条款为知情权的宪法依据,也有学者认为宪法序言中"国民主权"表述为知情权依据.信息公开法未使用"知情权"概念,而强调"国民主权"和政府的"说明责任".国民主权与知情权属不同层次的概念,在法律条文中同时出现并不矛盾.为保护和发展公民权利,"知情权"应当在信息公开法中得到确认.     

宪法解释权和适用权是实现宪法监督的关系——英美法系司法审查权的启示

英美法系国家的宪法监督权,通常由普通法院和专门机关来行使,这些机关均享有宪法解释权和适用权,宪法监督主体享有宪法解释和适用权是行使宪法监督权的关键和保证。     

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.     

人的尊严、宽容与同性恋者权利的宪法保障

同性恋者权利运动在全球范围内的发展,促使人们关注同性恋者权利面临的各种问题.争取同性恋者权利的曲折历程对现代人权文化提出了新的挑战,要求我们从人的尊严、宽容的哲学与宪法视角,尊重和保障同性恋者的权利,维护人的尊严与人类生活的多样性价值,并结合中国国情做出合理的政策与法律选择.     

The Lisbon Judgment of the German Constitutional Court,the Primacy of EU Law and the Problem of Kompetenz‐Kompetenz: A Conflict between Right and Right in Which There is No Praetor1

The ECJ has long asserted its Kompetenz‐Kompetenz (the question of who has the authority to decide where the borders of EU authority end) based on the Union treaties which have always defined its role as the final interpreter of EU law. Yet, no national constitutional court has accepted this position, and in its Lisbon Judgment of 2009 the German Constitutional Court (FCC) has asserted its own jurisdiction of the final resort' to review future EU treaty changes and transfers of powers to the EU on two grounds: (i) ultra vires review, and (ii) identity review. The FCC justifies its claim to constitutional review with reference to its role as guardian of the national constitution whose requirements will constrain the integration process as a standing proviso and limitation on all transfers of national power to the EU for as long as the EU has not acquired the indispensable core of sovereignty, i.e. autochthonous law‐making under its own sovereign powers and constitution, and instead continues to derive its own power from the Member States under the principle of conferral. Formally therefore, at least until such time, the problem of Kompetenz‐Kompetenz affords of no solution. It can only be ‘managed’, which requires the mutual forbearance of both the ECJ and FCC which both claim the ultimate jurisdiction to decide the limits of the EU's powers—a prerogative which, if asserted by both parties without political sensitivity, would inevitably result in a constitutional crisis. The fact that no such crisis has occurred, illustrates the astute political acumen of both the FCC and the ECJ.     

论中国农民宪法平等权的保障

农民不能真正享受宪法平等权是中国当下人权保障制度中最严峻的问题。表现为:中国的选举制度及户籍制度使农民沦为政治上的"二等公民";农民是经济利益的最大牺牲者和最小受惠者;国家教育资源配置不公导致农民及其子女只能接受差等教育;农民没有资格同市民一样享受医疗养老等社会保障。因此,应当修改选举法改革户籍制度;确定农业优先的经济战略,改善农民的民生;通过教育改革在城乡之间公平配置教育资源;建立覆盖城乡的社会保障体系。     

宪法学研究范式与宪法学中国化

自托马斯·库恩 196 2年在《科学革命的结构》中提出“范式”概念以后 ,在社会科学的研究中学者们普遍采用了“范式”的概念 ,以寻找研究问题的系统的思考方式与思维框架。库恩认为 ,范式是常规科学所赖以运作和成立的理论基础和实践规范。由于社会现象的复杂性与意识形态性 ,学者们研究某一问题时必然涉及普遍接受和运用的概念、模式、基本的理论框架与研究方法等。宪法学作为社会科学的组成部分 ,在理论研究与实践发展过程中也需要确立共同的“研究范式” ,以保持宪法学理论基础和实践规范的统一。从一般意义上宪法学研究范式涉及本体论、…     

为自己作证的权利及其真实义务——论英美法被告人作证权制度及其对大陆法系的影响

被告人作证权制度是英美法特有的一项制度,是在十九世纪中期边沁功利主义思想影响下确立的。在英美法国家,被告人如果要在法庭上陈述事实就要像其他证人一样,走上证人席,宣誓作证。被告人作证时不受不得强迫自证己罪原则的保护,对控辩双方的提问必须如实回答,故意虚假陈述将构成伪证罪。二战之后,部分大陆法国家或地区在改造职权主义庭审方式时,都不约而同地借鉴了被告人作证权制度,形成了相对独特的调查被告人程序。我国也不例外。但我国的调查被告人程序不符合无罪推定原则、控辩平等对抗原则和证明责任分配原则的精神,有待进一步的完善。     

Provisional Court Protection in Administrative Disputes in Europe: The Constitutional Status of Interim Measures Deriving from the Right to Effective Court Protection. A Comparative Approach

Abstract: Interim protection in remedies against the public administration has proved to be one of the key issues in today's justice. In effect, the slowness of judicial proceedings means that final judicial decisions cannot guarantee the rights and interests of the litigants any more, because those decisions arrive too late. Thus, effective judicial protection is at stake. On the other hand, public administrations have traditionally disposed of privileges, one of the most important of them being the so‐called executive character of administrative acts. The national debate on the equilibrium between both principles—effective judicial protection and the executive character of administrative acts—needs to be exported to the Community law context. Community law should therefore learn from national experiences, as other legal orders, such as the Spanish one, have done, turning to comparative law in order to improve their own model of interim protection.     

宪法文本中"人权条款"的规范分析

2004年宪法修正案的亮点之一是人权"人宪"①,突出了人权在国家生活中的坐标与功能,使人权从一般的政治原则转变为统一的法律概念和具有独立规范价值的宪法原则,预示着国家价值观的深刻变化.     

Friends of the Court: The Republican Alliance and Selective Activism of the Constitutional Court of Turkey

During the past two decades, scholars have noted a global expansion of judicial power and court‐led rights revolutions. Far from leading a rights‐revolution, the Constitutional Court of Turkey became renowned for its restrictive take on civil liberties during this period. Why are some high courts more activist than others in protecting and expanding civil rights and liberties? I argue that judicial power and judicial independence offer incomplete explanations of judicial activism on questions of rights. Even powerful courts are activist only selectively, using their clout to protect some groups while suppressing the demands of others. Building on perspectives on legal mobilization and judicial entrenchment, I argue that the sociopolitical alliances in which high courts and judiciaries participate explain the selective nature of their activism. The initial parameters of these alliances are set during critical junctures when formerly dominant coalitions are displaced and new institutions entrench new alliances. Such alliances are not static, however, and struggles within alliances can transform high courts' orientations on rights questions.     

From Cold War Instrument to Supreme European Court: The European Court of Human Rights at the Crossroads of International and National Law and Politics

The history of the genesis and institutionalization of the European Convention on Human Rights offers a striking account of the innovation of a new legal subject and practice—European human rights—that went along with, but also beyond, the political and legal genesis of Europe following World War II. The rise of the European human rights institutions shows not only how law and lawyers played key roles in the early politics of European integration but also how the subtle combination of law and politics—as both national and international strategies—continued to play a decisive part in the institutionalization of European human rights. The article generally argues that the interplay between law and diplomacy had a fundamental impact on the innovation of European law and that lawyers capable of playing an intermediary role between the two were particularly central to this development.