【作者】 王坚；

【导师】 肖唐镖；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 宪法与行政法学， 2012， 博士

【摘要】 “行”乃人之基本需求之一,其在整个社会系统的建制当中表现为“交通需求”,从主客体关系角度着眼,对此种需求之满足即为主体之利益所在,而此利益之具体化即为供公众通行利用的各种“路”,由于私人或者没有动机激励或者没有实际能力,所以,公共道路交通资源的有效供给必然主要依赖于国家及政府,“路权”概念之重释及路权体系的建立,其理论目的即在于反映和规范此种基本关系,亦即“行”需求之权利化。而以“权利发展”的眼光检视满足人之“行”的基本需求的交通发展,论证作为法律权利的“路权”的正当性及可行性即是本文的理论红线,在对“路权”概念做出明确界定的基础上,阐释其作为一种权利类型的各方面特征,则是本文的基本线索,而特征之阐释则是通过路权之法理构成、权利系谱中的位置与比较、路权法制类型之探讨这一基本框架来展示。全文的章节分布除“结语”之外,分为“绪论”、“路权概念之重释”、“路权法理构成之解析”、“权利系谱中的路权”、“路权法制之实证检讨：类型化的思考”五个部分,具体内容分别如下。在“绪论”一章,首先,提示路权研究的理论意义在于,一方面,于权利理论研究中,其属权利“个案研究”和“本体研究”,而非单纯的价值研究或宏观研究,因此一定程度上是对整体权利研究的推进；另一方面,它是行政法学理体系中的部门行政法或称特别行政法研究——交通(行政)法研究,同时也是人权法或基本权利理论的一次应用型研究,在此两个领域,目前国内学界都涉及很少,因此“路权”研究亦有重要价值。其次,作了较为细致的文献综述,一方面展示了国内路权讨论在形式和实质两个面向的不足：“路权”一词实际上有六种以上的内涵,且不同内涵的论者之间基本没有沟通交流,对“路权”的权利基础、权利属性、主体特征、义务人等基本问题,特别是对“路”的认识,都远未达到自觉的程度；另一方面,揭示了英美法系的“公共信托理论”以及大陆法系的“公物理论”,与路权研究之间的异同,即,前者理念上虽与“路权”接近,都是从作为公众的利用人一方出发,但讨论的对象却不是人工的道路而主要是土地、水等自然资源,后者虽将道路作为“人工公物”来研究,但却主要从行政一方出发,而非从公众利用人角度展开。再次,特别指出,由于部门行政法研究的特殊性,为弥补行政法总论的共通性知识与特定行政部门之专业性的冲突,本文采用的是多学科交叉或称跨学科的研究策略,即,尽可能的消化容纳交通工程学、交通社会学、交通经济学以及交通规划与管理等学科的知识养料。“路权概念之重释”一章中,首先是为“路权”概念的界定做好两个方面的理论准备：其一,从权利理论的两种传统——自然法理论与功利主义——出发,为路权寻求了坚实的基础,亦即其核心要素“合理的交通需求”,从权利理论的两种进路——“权利义务关系”与“权利权力关系”之中,将路权定位为“权利权力关系”的公法进路,从两种概念分类——抽象概念与类型概念——出发,展示了路权其实是一束具体权利组成的权利类型而非一个抽象权利；其二,解释了与路权相关的几个重要概念：“行”、“交通”、“运输”、“路”、“TDM(交通需求管理)”、“交通法”、“公物法”。在此基础上,将“路权”界定为,就是使用各种公共道路交通资源的权利,具体是指,在公共资源有限的条件下,为满足用路人合理的交通需求而由法律规定的,保障用路人生命和财产安全以及自由、平等的利用公共道路交通资源的利益、权利或特权的集合。第三章“路权法理构成之解析”是全文的重要章节,即从内部视角全面解析“路权”法理的四个主要构成部分：作为路权客体的“路”、作为路权主体的“用路人”、路权义务人以及路权类型中的具体权利体系。其中,路权客体之“路”即各种公共道路交通资源,具体是指提供公众利用的各种交通线路设施,以及与之相对应的最低限度的公共交通工具及必要的服务,路权客体有四个方面的特征：路权客体具有公共物品或准公共物品的特性；之于国家或地区的政治、军事、经济都具有基础性的作用；对土地等自然资源的直接依存性；表现出“人工性”和“技术性”逐渐加强的特征。“用路人”是指,作为交通需求主体或道路利用主体的自然人或自然人群体,其也有四个方面特征：用路人具有显著的工具外衣性,但绝不能与交通工具等同论之；于机械化和信息化的现代交通社会系统中,用路人对路权客体具有高度依赖性,因为客体所承载的利益具体化是用路人享受就学、就医、就业、经济文化社会活动等等领域权利的前提条件；用路人在交通系统中的身份具有“随机性”和“可控性”,因此一定程度的交通需求管理和路权配置就是可能的和必要的；用路人具有“集合性”与“群落性”特征,即由于自然或社会(制度)的原因,用路人可以分为不同的群体,例如,以机动能力强弱为标准,可分为普通用路人和弱势用路人。路权义务人体系,则由“国家——各级政府——相关的交通职能部门”、交通通事业单位或其他NGO组织、路桥公司及城市轨道经营公司等交通企业以及用路人自身四个方面组成。而路权类型中的具体权利体系,则因概念内涵之广狭分为最广义路权、广义路权、狭义路权与最狭义路权四组,其中的核心部分是作为狭义路权的“实际用路权”,但为了保障此实际用路权的有效行使,就有赖于一个功能完备的具体权利体系,而从价值诉求的层面展开的话,这一体系的底部便是保障安全的“用路空间权”(最狭义的路权),与实际用路权平行的(即广义的路权)则是以自由为价值诉求的“用路知情权”、“用路选择权”、“用路监督权”、“用路救济权”,和以平等为价值诉求的“普通群体用路权”、“弱势群体用路权”(又分为“无障碍通行权”和“适足道路利用权”),而实际用路权之下还可依据交通需求之性质做不同的具体权利分类。第四章“权利系谱中的路权”,则是从外部的视角来考察路权类型,其中,“自由权与社会权两分法中路权”和“财产权观念演进中的路权”主要是对路权属性的考察,而“路权与住宅权”和“路权与迁徙自由权”则是实质性的比较。简言之,,一方面,路权的社会权属性较之自由权属性更加显著,即需要国家及政府积极行动、主动供给,但其也有自由权属性,例如其可从人身自由权派生而来；另一方面,随着财产权的观念演进,由于交通作为给付行政和福利主义的典型代表,且其还是用路人享受其他各种权利的条件,因此其已然成为重要的财产形式,具有部分的财产权属性。在路权与住宅权的实质比较中,可以发现二者的权利基础分别为人之基本需求的“住”与“行”,都可以从《国际人权宪章》中的“适当生活水准权”中推导出来,但住宅权的制度化和受重视的程度都远高于路权；在路权与迁徙自由权的实质比较中,可以发现二者最大的共性在于,都可以在人之“行”的基本需求中找到根基,且都能从人身自由权中推导出来,但迁徙自由权的自由权属性较显著,而路权的社会权属性更浓。于“路权法制之实证检讨：类型化的思考”一章中,首先,在简要梳理交通史和交通法制史的基础上,以韦伯的“理念类型”为工具,对“农业社会——马车时代”、“工业社会——汽车时代”和“后工业社会——后汽车时代”的路权法制在“路权客体功能诉求”、“用路人与路权义务人关系”以及“用路人之间关系”三个方面的典型特征做一定程度的抽象和提升,构建了“政治——统治型”、“经济——安全型”和“人本——自由型”三种路权法制类型；其次,对我国目前的交通法制现状做了静态和动态两种考察,在静态考察中指出我国交通法律部门在宪法渊源方面的模糊、重要交通法律缺失或效力级别太低、交通行政体制不顺、重要分类标准不一、立法粗糙操作性不强等等不足,在动态考察中,通过对从“北大法宝司法案例库”、“CNKI知网资源库”和“网络媒体资源”中检索获得的一百多个路权法制事例的综合分析,发现我国目前路权法制的主要问题是“交通安全与事故责任分配”、“收费公路相关问题”、“禁摩、禁电、禁微、汽车限购拍牌等禁行限行问题”、“道路规划建设及利用管理问题”以及“公共交通的有效供给不足”等方面；作为考察分析的结果,指出我国目前的路权法制,虽然还遗留着一些“政治——统治型”的特征,也出现一些“人本——自由型”的理念特征,但是,总体而言,我国目前的现状更接近“经济——安全型”路权法制,因此还有很大的改善空间。更多还原

【Abstract】 "Travel" is one of the basic needs of human being, which expressed as "the traffic demand "in the whole social organizational systems. From the standpoint of the "subjective-objective" relationship,the satisfy to the demands is the interests of subjects. Therefore, the reification of interests shall be available for public access uses on a variety of "Road". Lacking of motivation and capacity, effective supply of public road transport resources must mainly rely on the State and Government. The concept of "right of way" and the system right of way start to rebuild, which aim to reflect and regulate some basic relationship such as the rights to demand for "travel". However, when we view the development of transport and transport rule of law, we will find expound the legitimacy and feasibility of the "right of way" become the red line in the article.After we define the concept of right of way, explain a type of right become a basic clues. Legal principle of right of way, rights pedigree position and, basic framework of the legal system display the characteristics of interpretation.The full text of the chapters are divided into five parts:"Introduction","rebuild the concept of right of way","the construction of jurisprudence in right of way","the right of way in rights system","Empirical review:Type of Thinking ",and the specific contents are as follows.In the chapter of "Introduction ", firstly, the reason it prompt the right of way research is that the study is belong to the theory of "case studies "and "itself studies" rather than the simple value study and washy study. At the same time,the study also belong to Traffic (Administration) Act Study which known as fad-ministrative law and administrative department or special administrative law research.In the two areas, the "right of way" study has an important worth. Secondly, made a detailed literature review, On the one hand, reveal the deficiencies in both form and substance-oriented in right of way study. On the other hand,reveal right of way study the similarity and difference about between "public trust doctrine" in Common Law and "public property theory" in Civil Law. Thirdly, because of the particularity of department Administrative Law, this article adopt a multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary research strategy. Digest nourishment on the traffic engineering, traffic sociology, transportation economics, as well as transportation planning and management disciplines as much as possible. In the chapter of "rebuild the concept of right of way", made two theoretical preparations for the concept of right of way. On the basic of concepts defined on right theory(two traditional,two approach, and two type of the concept) and important related concepts ("Travel","transport","transportation","Road","TDM:Transportation Demand Management","traffic law","public property law"), it definite the right of way as the right to use a variety of public road transport resources, and the core in "reasonable traffic demand", Specifically, it’s a Collection of benefits, rights or privileges in the premise of limited public resources, we must meet the traffic demand, protection the passer’s life, property safety, and free, equality to use public road.The third chapter of "the construction of jurisprudence in right of way" is an important chapter, That is, from the internal perspective we analyst the legal principle of "right of way" in four main components. First of all, object of right of way "road" is a variety of public road transport resources, specifically, provide the public use of the various transport line facilities,and Minimum of public transport and essential services. Second,"passers-by "is the main natural person or a natural person groups.Third,the system of the obligor of the right-of-way, which composed by National-all levels of government-the traffic departments, transportation pass and institutions or other NGO organizations, road and bridge and urban rail operating companies, transport enterprises, and passers-by itself."Passers" refers to a natural person or a natural person groups as traffic demand subject, which possess four characteristics. Third, the right-of-way obligor system, which Composed by National-all levels of government-the traffic departments, transportation pass and institutions or other NGO organizations, road and bridge and urban rail operating companies, transport enterprises, and passers-by itself.Fourth, Specific rights in the system,which divided into four groups of the broadest sense of the right of way, the broad right-of-way, narrow right-of-way, with the most narrowly defined right of way.In the fourth chapter, expedite from four aspects of external perspective, first of all,from the between liberty and social right we can pointed out that the properties of the social rights is significantly more than the properties of the freedom right,that is, Country and the government needs to take action, take the initiative to supply, but also has the property of the freedom.Second, another joint that pointed out a typical representative of the traffic as the payment for administrative and welfarism,and it has the conditions for passers-by to entitled, so,that why it become an important form of property, has the property of a part of the property.Third,compare the figure between right of way and right of housing, the article pointed out that the basic needs of both rights-based man "live" and "travel" can be derived from "the right of adequate standard of living" in International Charter of Human Rights,but The institutionalization of the right to housing and the level of attention is much higher than the right of way. Fouth, from the substantive comparison between right of way and right of freedom to movement, Find out the most biggest commonality is that we can find foundation in basic needs, and can be derived from the right of personal liberty, however, the right of freedom to movement is more significant in property of freedom right and the right of way is more significant in property of social rights.In the chapter of "Empirical review:Type of Thinking", Firstly, Combing transportation history and traffic legal, utilize Weber’s means of "idea type", build a "politics-rule type ","economic-security type" and "Human-free type".Secondly, inspect our current legal situation transportation from static and dynamic, In the static point of view pointed out some insufficient.In the dynamic investigation, pointing out that China’s current traffic law, through a comprehensive analysis of more than one hundred typical cases of right-of-way retrieved from the "the Chinalawinfo judicial cases", Base of CNKI and Net Resource, Again, as a result of the investigation and analysis, the article pointed out that China’s current legal system in right-of-way, remains a few "politics-rule type" characteristics, emerges some idea of "Human-free type",but Generally speaking, China’s current legal system in right-of-way is on the stage of "economy-safe type", and have much room to develop.更多还原