【作者】 杜学文；

【导师】 杨海坤；

【作者基本信息】 苏州大学 ， 宪法学与行政法学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 “战争与和平”这一主题直接关涉人类的尊严和福祉,对人类的意义自然是不言而喻,也几乎没有人会对此有所怀疑。但相对而言很少有法学学者的相关论著,即使有也大多是国际法学者。将和平纳入法哲学(法理学)、宪法学、人权法学视野本身具有重大的理论和现实意义。战争犹如人类的梦魇总是挥之不去,一部人类文明史也可以说是一部战争与和平史。人类历史上有一个奇怪的现象:人人都渴望和平,但战争从未停止;所有的战争,无论其动机多么不堪,无不以正义之名宣战。但人类从未停止追求和平,无数先贤对和平孜孜以求。第一次世界大战后,《国际联盟》特别是1928年《巴黎非战公约》的签订使得战争制度在法律上被废除了,战争成为非法行为。为避免人类再度遭受两次世界大战的惨祸,《联合国宪章》不仅禁止了战争,而且禁止在国际关系上使用武力,完全彻底地否定了传统国际法所承认的国家的绝对战争权。但战争并未远离人类,并没有随着《联合国宪章》的制定和冷战的结束而结束。《联合国宪章》所确立的集体安全保障体制和禁止在国际关系上使用武力的原则面临挑战。因此,我们必须转换视角,以人权的范式——和平权来对抗国家主动发动非正义战争的权利。因为战争是人类最大的威胁,战争是对人的生命、尊严、自由、财产和环境这些基本人权最严重的破坏。和平权作为第三代人权中的代表性权利,得到了一系列国际法律文件的确认,但和平权在诸多方面都存在巨大争议。以致很多学者认为,和平权如果作为一个人类追求的目标或者作为国际社会的政策或策略,本无可非议。但是作为一项法律权利,其定义、内容和相对应的义务都存在很多不确定因素。笔者的这篇论文正是试图全面回应这一问题。笔者提出,和平权的产生和发展得益于两个关键因素:一是思想观念因素,和平思想与人权理念的结合是和平权产生和发展的思想基础;二是国际政治实践因素,国际社会进行的长期反战努力是和平权产生和发展的实践基础。随后,笔者提出了和平权的概念,即:和平权是得到社会所认同的,人有必要生存于非战争状态之中的正当性。简言之,和平权就是人的和平生存的权利。笔者还指出,和平权的权利主体只能是个人和人的共同体,其义务主体只能是国家,而非其他。在此基础上笔者进一步指出,和平权在本质上是一种抵抗权,它兼具消极权利和积极权利的属性,是一种社会连带性质的权利。但和平权并不意味着绝对的和平主义,联合国安理会授权的军事行动,以及以自卫为目的的反侵略战争、反分裂战争和反恐战争等为代表的正义战争不受此限制。和平权的正当性论证是和平权权利证成的关键,笔者通过人的尊严理论证明——战争是对人的尊严的最严重的践踏,人的尊严是和平权得以演绎的基础;通过社会契约论证明:和平是人们订立社会契约根本目标之一,统治者发动非正义的战争是违背社会契约的暴行,和平权是人根据社会契约所应有的保留权利,是不可剥夺、不可转让、不可放弃的自然权利。和平权也是罗尔斯所设想的“原初状态”中,处于“无知之幕”下人们的“重叠共识”和理性选择;通过哈贝马斯的商谈理论证明:和平权是在“理想的言语情境”中,根据商谈原则,每一个参与者都采用一种普遍的他者视角所形成的真实、有效的共识。但和平权最终成为一项基本人权,仅有正当性是不足的,还需要有实践的必要性。因此,笔者又将研究的重点放在和平权的实证研究,包括和平权规范的实证研究、日本和平宪法的实证研究以及和平权的司法实证研究。如果和平权仅仅停留在理论上、观念中或文本里,那么它就难免流于形式。因此,和平权必须在国际保护和国内保护两个层面获得加强。目前的人权国际保护机制还很不完善,作为一种新型人权的和平权,其国际保护更须加强。就和平权而言,由于其对国际和平与安全的重大影响,在没有专门的国际保护机制建立之前,它的国际保护最终要依赖联合国框架内的人权保护机制。笔者提出,和平权的国内保护主要有两种途径:立法保护——和平权入宪;司法保护——建立宪法法院模式的违宪审查制度。和平作为一项人权的诉求,与基于宗教信仰或道德主张而对和平的永久追求不同,在观念上与实践上都是全新的,虽面临巨大挑战,但和平权正逐步获得国际社会的认同,其实施机制也在逐渐建立,这一趋势已经确立并将不可逆转。更多还原

【Abstract】 "War and Peace" is directly connected with the dignity and well-being of human, and no one doubts. However, relatively few international lawyers investigate the thing. This is a very unique phenomenon because the legal scholars about the philosophy of law (jurisprudence), constitution, human rights have been engaged in research seldom. I incorporate peace into the philosophy of law (jurisprudence), constitution and human rights law; it has major theoretical and practical significance.War is always lingering like a nightmare of mankind. A history of human civilization can be said to be a history of war and peace. The history of mankind has a strange phenomenon: We all want peace, but war never stopped; all wars, regardless of their motivation, declare a war which was based on justice. But human beings have never stopped the pursuit of peace, including countless sages.After World War I, "International Union" in particular the "Paris-antiwar pact" of 1928 makes the war system abolished in law, and war has become illegal. In order to avoid further horrors resulting from the world wars, "the United Nations Charter" not only inhibit the war, but also prohibit the use of force in international relations, it fully and completely negate the country’s absolute war right by the internationally traditional law recognized. But the war did not stay away from humans and did not end with the "UN Charter" to develop and the end of the Cold War. The collective security indemnification system established by "UN Charter" and the use of force in international relations are challenging. Therefore, we must convert perspective based on the paradigm of human rights - the right to oppose an unjust war. Because war is the greatest threat to humanity and is also the most serious damage to basic human rights such as a human life, dignity, liberty, property and environment and so on.The right to peace as a representation right of the third-generation human rights has been confirmed by a series of international legal documents, but the right to peace has a huge controversy in many ways. Many mm many scholars believe that the right to peace is beyond reproach if it has been made a human goal or the international community’s policy and strategy. But its definition, content and the corresponding obligations have many uncertainties as a legal right. The author attempt to a comprehensive response to this issue.The author suggest that the emergence and development of the right to peace result from two key factors: First, ideas factors, the integration of the concept of peace and human rights is the ideological foundation for the emergence and development; Second, the practice of international political factors, the international community’s long-term anti-war efforts are the practical foundation of the right to peace developed and produced.Subsequently, the author proposed the concept of the right to peace, that peace is a right to get accepted by the community, people need to survive legitimacy in a state of the non-war. In short, the right to peace is rights people who enjoyed. And the subject of peace rights can only be the individuals and human communities, its obligations can only be a national rather than other. On this basis, the author further pointed out that the right to peace was essentially a right of resistance, which had both the property of negative rights and positive rights,it is a kind of rights which has a joint nature of society. However, the right to peace does not mean that absolute pacifism, some just wars such as military action authorized by the UN Security Council, as well as anti-aggression, anti-separatist war and the war on terrorism for the purpose of self-defense were restricted.The legitimacy demonstration of the right to peace is the key to the license of the right to peace. I adopted the theory of the human dignity - war is the most serious violation to human dignity, the human dignity is the basis for interpretation about the right to peace; I proved through a social contract theory: that peace is a fundamental goal of social contracts, the rulers launching an unjust war is a violation of the atrocities of the social contract, the right to peace is a person who should have reserved the right under the social contract ,it is a kind of natural right which is inalienable, non– transfer and no-abandoned. The right envisaged by Rawls’s "original position " to peace is also "overlapping consensus" under the people and rational choice; through Habermas’s discourse theory to prove: the right to peace formed a real and effective consensus which is the "ideal speech situation ", according to negotiate the principles and each participant who uses a universal perspective.However, the right to peace which eventually has became a basic human right, has only justification inadequate, but also requires the need to practice. Therefore, I make the study focus on the empirical research of right to peace, including the right to peace standardized, Japan’s pacifist constitution, as well as the right to peace of justice.If the right to peace is only in theory, ideas, or the text inside, then it is bound to a mere formality. Therefore, the right to peace must be strengthened on the base of the international and domestic protection. The current international human rights protection mechanisms is far from perfect, its international protection should be stepped up as a new human right to peace. Its international protection ultimately depend on human rights protection mechanisms within the framework of the United Nations, since it has a major impact on international peace and security, but at present community is in the absence of specific mechanisms of international protection.I suggested that the domestic protection of the right to peace has two main ways: legislation protection - the right to peace in the Constitution; judicial protection - the establishment of the Constitutional Court of models unconstitutional censorship.The peace being a aspirations of a human right is new in concept and practice, and The peace’s opinions are different from religious beliefs or moral right to pursue a permanent peace. Although it faces enormous challenges, the right to peace is gradually gaining the recognition of the international community and its implementation mechanism has been established, this trend will be irreversible.更多还原