| 摘要: | 基本人權保障為近代立憲主義以降的憲法核心價值，憲法學之研究自當以基本人權保障及其相關概念著手不可。如何正確理解基本人權保障的概念，為本論文之主要目的，特別選定日本國憲法作為研究對象。
日本憲法第十一與第九十七條的規範意旨強調，「本憲法所保障之基本人權，為不可侵犯之永久權利」。第十二條與第十三條條文則是規範，「憲法所保障之權利與自由，不得濫用，應負有為公共福祉之責任」、「不違反公共福祉為限，立法與其他國政，應予以最大之尊重」。日本憲法學界對上述條文之解釋，一方面認為日本憲法所保障之權利，具有不被侵害之永久性的自然權本質；另一方面，卻又認為憲法對於基本人權的保障，非絕對毫無限制，而是在「公共福祉」之概念下，個別基本人權間之相互衝突與矛盾，必須由人權體系內，依各種不同人權性質相互調整其保障界限。
目前，關於「公共福祉」的概念不應被解釋為限制國民權利概念的看法，已經殆無疑義。日本國憲法第十三條條文所規範，「不違反公共福祉之限度內，立法及其他國政之運作，應予以最大之尊重」的規定，更不應該被解釋為，「立法及其他國家權力」用以制約國民權利之一般性依據。就國民權利保障之觀點而言，「公共福祉」的概念，毋寧解釋為限制國家公權力行使的依據，國家公權力對國民權利與自由予以限制時，應負起舉證說明之責任。
藉由日本憲法學界對於基本人權保障理論，特別是基本人權制約理論的論述過程，將有助於對基本人權保障理論及相關概念，更加全面與完整性地之正確理解與認識。
Human rights protection is the core value of contemporary constitutionalism, thus concepts based on human rights protection should be the very fundamental of constitutional jurisprudence. This paper is to properly interpret human rights protection concepts as regarding Japanese Constitution as the study body.
In Japanese Constitution, the Article 11 and Article 97 emphasize that "The fundamental human rights protected by this Constitution are the inviolable rights permanently" and, Article 12 and Article 13 illustrate that "who shall refrain from any abuse of these freedoms and rights and shall always be responsible for utilizing them for the public welfare.", "to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs" respectively. The Japanese constitutional jurisprudence academic, on the one hand, refers the rights protected by Japanese Constitution are "the natural rights" with permanent nature of inviolability. On the other hand, they believe fundamental human rights should be concurrent with the concepts of "public welfare". In case there would be conflicts between individual human rights should turn to comprehensive human rights system to coordinate the priority under different rights properties.
It has been consensus that “public welfare” should not be referred to the restriction against citizen human rights. The Article 13 of Japanese Constitution that, “to the extent that it does not interfere with the public welfare, be the supreme consideration in legislation and in other governmental affairs”, should neither be interpreted as the general background to confine citizen human rights by any “legitimacy and governance”. From the viewpoint of citizen human rights protection, “public welfare” should be the required principal whenever the execution of governance from the public authority, as the result, once the governance would cause the restriction against citizen human rights, the public authority should be fully obligated for the reasonable explanation.
By study of the human rights protection theory framework formed by the Japanese constitutional jurisprudence academic, especially on the theory of necessary restriction conditions, would be helpful to properly and comprehensively understand the whole theory system of human rights protection and related concepts. |
