《经济、社会和文化权利国际公约》实施问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-11 01:30

本文选题：经济、社会和文化权利 + 国家义务　；参考：《政法论坛》2012年01期

【摘要】：随着人权法理论和实践的发展,人们逐渐改变了否定经济、社会和文化权利作为一项法定权利的观念,开始承认经社文权利与其他权利一样具有法律约束力,并在理论上取得了令人瞩目的突破。关于义务缺位论,根据国家义务的三分论,国家履行尊重的义务不再限于消极措施,而履行保护和实现的义务,也不一定要积极作为。因此,国家对人权保护承担的义务是多层次的,且无可逃遁。关于资源耗费论,并非所有的经社文权利需要耗用资源,更多情况下,实现经社文权利的最佳途径是使个人自由免受国家干预,或者通过个人自主地调配资源。关于逐步实现论,《经济、社会和文化权利国际公约》对权利逐步实现的规定,其真正用意是要求无论缔约国贫富,都公平、有效、充分地利用资源,以一切适当方法在短期内实现权利。关于不可诉论,一国不提供司法补救,并不意味着该项权利具有不可审理的性质。形成经社文权利不可诉论断的原因,主要是裁决机构缺乏能力和意愿。而国内法院和区域性人权法院的司法判例,可作为经社文权利可诉性的最佳例证。时至今日,可以说人们多已从经社文权利是否可诉的讨论转移到更加细致的审判和执行的问题上。一方面,通过经济、社会和文化权利委员会的工作,进一步明确了《经济、社会和文化权利国际公约》内容的规范性,和缔约国所负有的国家义务。另一方面,对于那些权利实际上不可诉的国家来讲,更重要的义务是如何使得权利可诉。
[Abstract]:With the development of the theory and practice of human rights law, people have gradually changed the concept of denying economic, social and cultural rights as a legal right and began to recognize that economic, social and cultural rights are as legally binding as other rights, And has made a remarkable breakthrough in theory. With regard to the theory of absence of obligation, according to the three-point theory of state obligation, the obligation of state to fulfill respect is no longer limited to negative measures, and the obligation of protection and realization does not have to be actively acted. Therefore, the obligation of the state to the protection of human rights is multi-level, and there is no escape. On the theory of resource consumption, not all economic, social and cultural rights need to consume resources. In more cases, the best way to realize economic, social and cultural rights is to free individuals from state interference or to allocate resources independently. With regard to the doctrine of progressive realization, the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on the progressive realization of rights are truly intended to require the equitable, effective and full use of resources by States parties, rich and poor, The realization of rights in the short term by all appropriate means. With regard to non-justiciability, the non-availability of judicial remedies by a State does not mean that the right is non-justiciable. The reason why the right of economic, social and cultural rights is not justiciable is the lack of capacity and willingness of the adjudicators. The judicial jurisprudence of domestic courts and regional human rights courts can be the best example of the justiciability of economic, social and cultural rights. Nowadays, it can be said that people have shifted from the discussion of the justiciability of economic, social and cultural rights to the issue of more detailed trial and execution. On the one hand, through the work of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the normative nature of the content of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the obligations of States parties are further clarified. On the other hand, for those countries whose rights are practically non-actionable, the more important obligation is how to make them actionable.
【作者单位】：中国政法大学;
【分类号】：D99

【参考文献】