人权司法化问题研究

发布时间：2017-12-28 12:25

  本文关键词：人权司法化问题研究　出处：《武汉大学》2016年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

  更多相关文章： 人权 司法 保障 人权现实化 人权司法化

【摘要】：本文旨在探讨如下问题,即在我国社会主义法治建设重心已经实现从强调立法完善向更加注重法律实施转移的时代背景下,积极探索司法主导法定人权现实化的方法与途径,以期通过增强司法在人权法治保障方面的实效性以克服当前司法实践偏重于诉讼权利保障的潜在不足,一方面为我国未来的人权司法保障制度的健全与完善提供一种可能的理论参考与模式选择,另一方面也为本世纪中叶“中国梦”实现之际我国人权现实化目标的最大化实现提供一种更加周延的人权法治保障路径。在考察“人权司法保障”不同语义及其价值属性基础上,本文尝试性地提出了“人权司法化”的理论命题并就其制度性实践机制等相关问题进行了积极探索。“人权司法化”,或称“通过司法的人权保障”,是指当任何公民的任何法定人权在遭受不法侵害且该利益受损人有获得公权力救济的现实诉求时,那么就能够通过直接诉诸司法的方式获得全面、及时、有效救济。“人权司法化”主张司法在人权保障问题上应当秉持“当为性”与“完整性”立场,强调司法在人权法律化基础上实现对法定人权诉求的最终确认与积极落实,强调司法之于人权现实化的主导地位。其特点是蕴含逻辑必然性,彰显现实必要性,体现社会实践性,强调实施渐进性。本文主要是从“理论可能性”与“现实必要性”两个角度对“人权司法化”进行了逻辑证成。一是通过回溯并重新考察“人权的实质平等性”、“有权利必有救济的法治原则”、“人权可诉性理论”以及“司法的性质理论”等基础法学原理的基本内涵及其现实诉求探讨了“人权司法化”何以可能的问题：首先,“每个人享有平等关心和尊重的权利”(德沃金)是“人权司法化”的法哲学依据,揭示了人权的实质平等属性,强调了在尊重和保障人权问题上的绝对性和无条件性。其次,“有权利必有救济”的法治原则是“人权司法化”存在的法治性前提,实现了具体权利诉求与法治救济手段(司法自然在列)的有效沟通,为“平等关心与尊重的权利”的进一步现实化提供了制度性保障。再次,人权可诉性是“人权现实化”的直接法理依据,实际是指“法定人权的可诉性”,在本质上是人权可主张性与法律可诉性的有机结合,强调公权力(司法权)之于人权诉求进行救济的“当为性”与“完整性”特征。最后,司法权的性质理论是对“人权现实化”的一种补充性证明,强调近代司法自其产生之日起即担负着保障个体权利实现的神圣历史使命,以人权为终极目的与现实追求。除此之外,本文还从人权现实化历程,司法现代化发展以及法治中国建设等现实角度探讨了“人权司法化”的现实必要性问题。“人权司法化”的价值意义主要体现在理论与实践两个基本层面。一是从理论层面看,“人权司法化”是现代司法区别传统司法的关键要素,是近代司法权独立于行政权的逻辑前提,是法治社会人权现实化路径的理性回归。二是从实践层面看,“人权司法化”有利于健全完善我国当前的人权司法保障机制,有利于积极引导我国未来人权事业的繁荣发展。“人权司法化”的制度性实践机制是本文研究的最终落脚点,提出了通过人权法院制度保障法定人权现实化的理论构想。人权法院是专门处理人权争议纠纷的特殊司法机关。一是机构设置上,主要考虑两种情形：其一,其外部层级可考虑设置于跨省一级,具体可根据不同地区的相似地域特征、历史文化传统以及宗教信仰等因素确定所跨省域范围；其二,其内部部门可考虑统筹设立少数群体权利法庭、环保法庭等主要专门权利法庭,以实现司法资源配置的统筹化与集约化。二是人员组成上,主张兼顾人权案件审理的实践性、政治性、理论性以及社会性四大要素的平衡,采取“根据不同人员组成的性质确定具体来源”的策略,力避纯粹司法主义倾向。三是审理案件范围上,人权法院受理的案件应当仅限于尚未被具体部门法明确细化的基本权利争议或者通过普通司法程序审理本身存在合理性质疑的人权案件。此外,为保障法定人权现实化水平,对于及涉及基本人权的冤假错案的再审理亦应由该人权法院负责审理。四是审级效力上,人权法院实行二审终审制,其中二审程序由最高人民法院负责审理；对于其中可能涉及的宪法性问题争议,则由最高法院提请全国人大常委会作出宪法解释或说明,最高法院据此作出最终判决。
[Abstract]:This paper aims to explore the following issues, namely in the center of China's socialist construction of rule of law has been achieved from the emphasis on the perfection of legislation to pay more attention to the implementation of the law transfer under the background of the times, actively explore ways and means of legal human rights reality judicial led, in order to enhance the effectiveness of justice in the protection of human rights and the rule of law to overcome potential disadvantages of current judicial practice the emphasis on the protection of procedural rights, on the one hand, for the future of our judicial human rights guarantee system's perfect and provide a theoretical reference and model choice, maximize the other hand for the middle of this century "Chinese dream" on the occasion of human rights in our country to realize the goal of reality provides a more comprehensive protection of human rights and the rule of law. Based on the investigation of the different semantic and value attributes of "human rights judicial guarantee", this article tentatively puts forward the theoretical proposition of "human rights judicature" and makes some active exploration on its institutional practice mechanism and other related issues. "Judicial" or "human rights, through the protection of human rights" refers to justice, when any citizen in any legal human rights being infringed and the victim has practical demands to be the remedy of public power, so we can obtain a comprehensive, timely and effective relief through direct judicial way. "Judicial" human rights advocates justice should uphold the principle of "when" and "complete" position in the protection of human rights issues, emphasizing judicial law on human rights is implemented based on the final confirmation of legal human rights and actively implement, emphasize the judicial reality of human rights in a leading position. Its characteristic is logical inevitability, manifests the necessity of reality, embodies social practice and emphasizes the implementation of gradualness. This article is mainly from the "theoretical possibility" and "the reality necessity" two angles to "the human rights judicature" has carried on the logical evidence. One is by going back and re examines the "human rights equality", "rights must be protected by the principle of rule of law" and "human rights litigation theory" and "justice theory" and other basic legal principle basic connotation and realistic demands on "human rights judicial" the possibility of the problem: first of all, "everyone enjoys equal concern and respect for the rights" (Dworkin) "is the basis of legal philosophy of justice of human rights", reveals the essence of equal property rights, emphasizes the respect and protection of human rights on the issue of absolute and unconditional. Secondly, the principle of the rule of law is right there is relief "is the" rule of law of the premise of the existence of judicial "human rights, the realization of the rights and the rule of law (judicial remedies in natural column) to communicate effectively, further into the reality of equal concern and respect" right "has provided the guarantee of the system. Again, human rights litigation is "direct legal basis for human rights reality", refers to "legal human rights litigation", in essence is the human rights advocates and law can be the organic combination of litigation, emphasize the public power (Si Faquan) to the human rights relief "as" with "integrity" feature. Lastly, the theory of the nature of judicial power is a supplementary proof of the "realities of human rights". It emphasizes that the modern judiciary is responsible for protecting the realization of individual rights from the date of its emergence, and taking human rights as the ultimate goal and realistic pursuit. Besides, this paper also discusses the necessity of "human rights judicature" from the realities of human rights, the development of judicial modernization and the construction of rule of law in China. The value meaning of "human rights judicature" is mainly embodied in the two basic aspects of theory and practice. First, from a theoretical perspective, "human rights judicature" is the key element of modern judicature to distinguish traditional judicature. It is the logical premise of the independence of Modern Judicature from the executive power, and the rational return of the path of human rights realities in the rule of law society. Two, from a practical perspective, "human rights judicature" is conducive to improving and perfecting our current judicial protection mechanism for human rights, and is conducive to actively guiding the prosperity and development of human rights in the future. The institutional practice mechanism of "human rights judicature" is the ultimate goal of this paper, and a theoretical conception is put forward to guarantee the realization of statutory human rights through the court of human rights system. The human rights court is a special judicial organ specializing in dealing with disputes over human rights. One is the setting, mainly consider two situations: first, the external level may consider setting in provincial level, the provincial domain specific scope according to different regions of similar geographical features, historical and cultural traditions and religious beliefs and other factors; secondly, the internal departments may consider the court, the court of environmental protection of minority rights the main special rights court set up to achieve the overall co-ordination, and intensive allocation of judicial resources. The two is composed of personnel, both advocate the practice of human rights cases, theory of political, social and balance the four elements to "determine the specific source of staff according to the nature of different strategies, in order to avoid the tendency of pure judicial. Three, in the scope of trial cases, the cases accepted by the court of human rights should be limited to the basic rights disputes that have not yet been clearly defined by specific sector laws or through ordinary judicial procedures to try to hear human rights cases that have their own reasonable doubts. In addition, in order to ensure the realistic level of the legal human rights, the retrial of the wrongful and false cases involving the basic human rights should also be tried by the human rights court. Four is the effect on the trial level court of human rights, implementation of instance system, the procedure of second instance by the Supreme People's court is responsible for hearing; the constitution may involve the disputes by the Supreme Court of the NPC Standing Committee made a constitutional interpretation or explanation, according to the Supreme Court made a final ruling.
【学位授予单位】：武汉大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D921;D926
，

本文编号：1346010