救济权及其在当代中国实现的制度研究

【作者】 张维；

【导师】 林喆；

【作者基本信息】 中共中央党校 ， 政治学理论， 2009， 博士

【摘要】 救济权是人权研究不可回避的课题。救济权于人权保障具有重要意义。作为权利的救济总是与人的生存安全和生活质量的连续性状态相关联,它隐含着对人的自身生命和生活持久不被外界中断、扭曲、破坏或毁灭的一种最低限度的生存保障方式,它所所针对的不仅在于权利,更在于作为权利主体的“人”本身,它使得人可以作为有尊严的个体,保持基本的生存或生活样态。与救济权在人权体系中如此重要的地位不相称的是,目前关于救济权的全面系统的研究在相关学科内并未真正展开。即使在明确以救济权为基本术语的法学领域,对于救济权的专门研究方面也少有作为,目前为止,除林喆教授在其《公民基本人权法律制度研究》中对救济权作了全面的阐释之外,其他关于救济权的研究大多在基本的概念界定上具有浓重的部门法色彩,对于救济权缺乏基本理论角度的概念认知。而政治学领域对救济权的系统研究也同样匮乏,鲜有对于救济权之于人权保障的意义的认识及宏观的制度性探讨。此外,救济权的“对受损权利的补救”的意义被无限突出,许多学者更是否认其作为一种独立权利的存在,而将其作为权利的延展性功能。由此,救济权本身应当具有的获得国家及社会的物质或其他资源帮助的意义被有意无意地从救济权中剥离出来,以福利权、社会保障权、获得物质帮助权、救助权等其他不特定、不清晰甚至不规范的权利形式出现。而基础理论研究的先天不足,带来了在救济权的实现方面的系统研究也主要局限于程序上的实现探索,而名称各异、内容又有诸多交叉的救济权中的实体部分的研究也较为混乱。缺乏整体的制度设计自不必说,已有的零散的制度存在空白、模糊、矛盾之处也属多见,而我们的公民就是在这样一种相对混乱的体制下寻求救济的。因此,或是之于国家缔造太平的意义,或是基于个人保护权利的意义,对于救济权及其在当代中国的实现制度的研究都是必要的。什么是救济权?从政治学基础理论的视角,借助于一定的法学理论,将其置于人权体系中,应对救济权作出如下界定:救济权是指公民在其权利受到损害或有关生存的基本权利的实现存在阻碍,请求国家和社会为其提供帮助以弥补损害、实现权利的权利。简而言之,救济权就是程序性救济权和物质性救济权,这也是从广义上对于救济权的概念界定。程序性救济权,也可称其为获得程序帮助权,是指为公民权利的保障提供立法、行政或司法上的救济途径,也即恢复受损权利的权利。物质性救济权,也可称其为获得物质帮助和相关服务权,是指公民在基本生活无法得到保障的情况下,有从国家和社会获得作为生存基础的物质、经济资源帮助或其他有助于获取物质、经济资源的服务(如提供劳动培训)的权利。为了明晰救济权的确切所指,必须厘清救济权与相关概念,如福利权、社会保障权、社会权和请求权、救助权等权利的界限。此外,救济权的权利属性和价值分析也是深刻理解救济权所必须涉及的问题。由此,救济权是一种消极权利还是积极权利;是一种道德权利还是法律权利;是否应为宪法明确的公民基本权利;是否具备权利应当具有的可诉性从而获得司法的支持等关于救济权的权利属性问题在文中予以详解。就救济权的价值而言,主要以下几个方面:一是对主体独立性的保障;二是对主体权利的受损补救;三是对主体的生存安全和生活质量的保障。对于救济权的现有实现模式的总结概括是展开制度研究的基础。就目前世界范围内的相关制度和具体实践,根据所借助的主体和力量的性质,程序性救济权的实现模式主要有以下几种:自力救济模式(复仇、决斗、和解、自决、自卫、自损、回避);法律救济模式(司法救济、宪法救济、行政救济、立法救济、国家赔偿救济);政治救济模式(包括向政府和执政党申诉、告诉或以其他政治表达形式求助于政府,如集会游行示威、信访及政府主动采取的救济措施如赦免);社会救济模式(仲裁、调解)。物质性救济权的实现模式主要有以下几种:自力救济模式(个人的自救、家庭成员的扶助、穷人组织的自救);法律救济模式(立法救济、行政救济、司法救济);政治救济模式(以政策来规范救济行为、非制度化的作为政治性任务的济困活动、开展扶贫工作);社会救济模式(非政府组织的救济;社会互助)。回到当代中国的具体语境下,考察其救济权实现制度的得与失可以从四个方面进行:一是正当性考察,即作为公民权利书的宪法中是否有救济权的一席之地,救济权是否有相关法律和政策的制度形式;二是完整性考察,即公民在其权利受到损害后或需要获得权利实现所需资源时,是否有相应的制度化救济渠道;三是有效性考察,即每一种救济渠道是否最大限度地发挥了其制度功能;四是协调性考察,即针对同一种权利受损情况或权利自始不能实现所设置的各项救济机制中,相关主体的配合和相关机制的衔接是否积极有效。在对当代中国救济权实现制度作出全面考察之后,其中的利弊之处均显而易见。由此需要对症下药,提出相关的制度完善构想:司法救济权入宪,物质性救济权应作为法律权利;为物质性救济权立法;完善作为救济权实现核心机制的司法救济;等等。更多还原

【Abstract】 The right of relief is an issue of human rights, which can not be ignored. The right of relief is very important to the human rights: as the almsgiving to the right, it closely relates to the continuous situation of the living safety and quality with persons, which is also the defending method for the persons’life and permanence from intermit, distortion, destroy or extermination. The right of relief is devoted not only to the right, moreover it can make the people to be the respectable individual and make them keep the existence as the principal body of“human being”.Incompatible to the importance of the right of relief in the human rights system, at the moment the systematic, complicated research about the right of relief has not developed. Although in the scope for explaining the definition of the right of relief, the specific research about it is not effective. The fundamental definition has strong feature of the department of law, which lacks the cogitation for the definition, also lacks extrusive the meaning for the defense of human rights, even no discussion about institution from the macroscopically angel. Furthermore, the purport of the right of relief is extruded in the reign of procedure, also as the outstretched function of the right, not as the absolute one. The meaning of itself as the help for the national and social resources is palled off intentionally or inadvertently, making it show as the right of benefit, social defense, substantial help, saving and etc., which are not specific, unclear even nonstandard style of right, so the meaning is ignored as the preliminary human rights. But the congenital deficiency of fundamental theoretical research brings the research of the right of relief only in the completion of procedure; the research in the concrete departments of the right of relief makes people confused. It is lack of the systematic designs, moreover the contemporary institutions have many points which are pain, unclear and contradictory. The common public seeks relief under such disordered system. Therefore, thinking about the right of relief would be necessary for the national peace and tranquility, or for the meaning to protect the personal rights.What is the definition for the right of relief? The contemporary definitions for it probably could not give the satisfactory answers to us, because those ones nearly blur the values of the right of relief, which as one of the human rights and explanations on the basis of fundamental theory. In use of the political theory and the science of law, then putting it in the system of human rights, we should give such definition as follows: the right of relief means that the right for the petitionary state and society would give help to compensate the suffer and implementation, when the rights of common civilians have the hindrances to complete the rights of existences and when the rights of public get harmed. In simple words, the right of relief means the rights of relief in procedural and material, which also gives the definition from the broad field of view. The procedural right of relief also namely the right to get help procedurally, which means to provide the relief channels to the individual rights from legislation, administration or justice. Material right of relief also can be called the right to acquire the material help and relevant services, which is the right for the citizens who can get the material and economic services if they cannot get the fundamental life protections. In order to make the right of economy clear, the circumscription among the right of belief, benefit, society and petition and the others should be clarified. Except that, the attribution and the value analysis of the right of relief is the question that refers to how to understand the right of relief. Therefore, this article will give the detailed explanations about the following points: the right of relief is a negative or active right? does the constitution gives the clear definition for it? Does it has the nature of litigation? and some other points. As to the value of the right of relief, it has the following main aspects: firstly about defending the nature of independence; secondly compensating the harm for the main body of the right; thirdly safeguarding the existence safety and living quality of the main body. The summarizing of the implementation style for the right of relief is the basis to develop the research for the institutions. As to the relevant system and concrete practices, the implementations for the procedural right of relief mainly has the following methods on the basis of the natures for main body and strength: the methods for self-saving, including vengeance, duel, conciliation, self-decision, self-defense self-harm, evading; the methods for legal saving, including judicial saving, constitutional saving, administrative saving, legislative saving, national compensational saving; the methods for political saving, including appeal for the government and the leading party, telling or other methods to get help from the government, such as the parade, letters and visits from people or absolvent. For the material right of relief, we have the following methods: personal self-saving, including self-saving, family members saving, the poor saving; legal saving methods, including legislation saving, administrative saving and judicial saving; social saving methods, including non-governmental saving and social saving.Back to the concrete language situations of modern China, we will do research about the implementation system of the right of relief from the following four aspects: firstly the sense of legitimacy, namely as the rights of civilians in constitution; secondly the research about integrity, namely as the channels for the compensation when the rights for citizens are harmed; thirdly the research about the efficiency, namely that each relief channel exerts the functions; fourthly the research about the harmonies, namely as the relevant systems are efficient or not to the same right harmed or among the systems which are not used at the beginning.After across-the-board reviewing the complementation for the right of relief in China, the benefits and shortcomings are obvious. Therefore, we should suit the remedy to the case and bring forward the related conceive for the system, such as judicial right of relief into the constitution, the material right of relief to be the legal right, material right of relief to be legislated, to consummating the core system of the right of relief and etc.更多还原