社会宪治:刑法合宪性控制的一种思路
发布时间：2018-08-20 11:08
【摘要】：在现代社会,刑法的合宪性控制不仅意味着通过实定宪法原则对政治权力(立法)进行限制,而且还应当超越国家—社会(政治—法律)二元结构考察社会诸领域危害的刑法定罪与量刑标准。社会宪治是社会子系统与法律(经济—法律、媒体—法律等)间的结构耦合,是社会诸领域自我规制失效时的外部规制。社会宪治是功能分化条件下实定宪法的重要补充,也是罪刑法定实质内容在政治—法律关系之外的判断标准。在社会宪治下,基本权利的功能也从限制政治权力扩展到防止社会子系统过度膨胀。刑法运作必须识别社会宪治原则与社会诸领域茁生的基本权利。例如在经济领域,刑法应坚守限缩解释,尊重经济系统的自我反思机制;而在社会隐私权保护中,刑法则应当积极介入,保护具有连接社会系统与个体功能的隐私权实质内容。隐私权是基本权利(促进个体沟通自由),也是社会宪治意义上的结构耦合(防止自系统无限扩张)。
[Abstract]:In modern society, the constitutionality control of criminal law not only means that political power (legislation) is restricted by the principle of constitutionality. Moreover, it should go beyond the dual structure of state-society (politics-law) to examine the criminal conviction and sentencing standards of social harm in various fields. Social constitutional governance is the structural coupling between social subsystem and law (economy-law, media-law, etc.). It is the external regulation when self-regulation in various social fields fails. The rule of social constitution is an important supplement to the constitution under the condition of functional differentiation, and it is also the criterion of judging the substantive content of the crime and criminal law beyond the political-legal relationship. Under the rule of social constitution, the function of basic rights extends from restricting political power to preventing social subsystem from overexpanding. The operation of criminal law must recognize the principle of social constitutionalism and the basic rights of social fields. For example, in the economic field, the criminal law should adhere to the restrictive interpretation and respect the self-reflection mechanism of the economic system, while in the protection of social privacy, the criminal law should actively intervene to protect the essential content of the privacy right with the function of connecting the social system with the individual. The right to privacy is a basic right (to promote individual freedom of communication) and a structural coupling in the sense of social constitutionalism (to prevent the infinite expansion of self-system).
【作者单位】： 南京师范大学法学院;
【分类号】：D921;D924.3
本文编号：2193359
[Abstract]:In modern society, the constitutionality control of criminal law not only means that political power (legislation) is restricted by the principle of constitutionality. Moreover, it should go beyond the dual structure of state-society (politics-law) to examine the criminal conviction and sentencing standards of social harm in various fields. Social constitutional governance is the structural coupling between social subsystem and law (economy-law, media-law, etc.). It is the external regulation when self-regulation in various social fields fails. The rule of social constitution is an important supplement to the constitution under the condition of functional differentiation, and it is also the criterion of judging the substantive content of the crime and criminal law beyond the political-legal relationship. Under the rule of social constitution, the function of basic rights extends from restricting political power to preventing social subsystem from overexpanding. The operation of criminal law must recognize the principle of social constitutionalism and the basic rights of social fields. For example, in the economic field, the criminal law should adhere to the restrictive interpretation and respect the self-reflection mechanism of the economic system, while in the protection of social privacy, the criminal law should actively intervene to protect the essential content of the privacy right with the function of connecting the social system with the individual. The right to privacy is a basic right (to promote individual freedom of communication) and a structural coupling in the sense of social constitutionalism (to prevent the infinite expansion of self-system).
【作者单位】： 南京师范大学法学院;
【分类号】：D921;D924.3
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 蔡道通;;刑事法律的合宪性思考——一种审视民主的视角[J];环球法律评论;2006年04期
2 柳建龙;;合宪性推定原则:一个被误解的概念[J];浙江社会科学;2009年10期
3 刘练军;;何谓合宪性解释:性质、正当性、限制及运用[J];西南政法大学学报;2010年04期
4 王书成;;论合宪性解释方法[J];法学研究;2012年05期
5 哈维·惠勒;陈海峰;;公民不服从的合宪性[J];法治湖南与区域治理研究;2012年01期
6 王书成;;论合宪性推定之政治逻辑[J];华东政法大学学报;2009年01期
7 郑磊;;制度层面的合宪性限定解释[J];浙江社会科学;2010年01期
8 高秦伟;;美国“在家教育”的合宪性及其法律规制[J];比较教育研究;2010年06期
9 殷昕;;评当前房产限购政策——从合宪性角度考量[J];改革与开放;2013年08期
10 欧爱民;陈红梅;;论法律合宪性推定原则[J];湖南医科大学学报(社会科学版);2004年01期
相关重要报纸文章 前1条
1 何兵;通过程序挑战法律[N];法制日报;2000年
相关硕士学位论文 前3条
1 康恪峰;我国法院进行合宪性解释的理论证成[D];西南政法大学;2016年
2 宋冠超;合宪性法律解释研究[D];首都师范大学;2011年
3 余文斌;“当场击毙”立法的合宪性调整[D];苏州大学;2013年
，本文编号：2193359
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2193359.html
