| 摘要: | 日本國憲法保障的基本權，應受保護的內涵，無論是自由、平等、財產等，重要的特質在於，要求保障的對象是國家或公權力。基本權乃是日本國憲法的核心，既然日本國憲法規範的對象是日本國，則日本國根據憲法規定，必須成為基本權的保護者。此處的日本國民基本權保護者的國家或政府或公權力體制係指，國會、內閣、行政各部門、法院、地方公共團體等。
既然是日本國憲法，則不受憲法統制的非日本國的外國政府，即不在此對象之內。此外，私人即使具有與國家匹敵的巨大實力，亦無法成為基本權的保護者。雖有論者提出，基本權難道無法拘束私人？即私人間效力論的問題，但必須注意的是，上述問題的反面問法是，基本權的保護者是否可斷言僅是國家？在此意涵下，基本權的私人間效力論，則是特殊的討論。
本論文將針對原則與例外圖示（壹）、三階段審查：保護、限制、正當化（貳）、基本權保護領域：意義、劃定、競合（肆）、基本權限制（伍）、保護領域與限制的關係（陸）、限制的正當化：法律的制約與基於法律的制約、委任立法、條例的保留、規範的明確性、公共福祉、比例衡量手法與目的、手段、比例原則的審查圖示。最後提出結語：審查基準、審查密度與雙重基準。(488字)
The basic rights guaranteed by the Constitution of Japan should be protected. Whether it is freedom, equality, property, etc., the important feature is that the object of protection is the state or public power. Fundamental rights are the core of Japan's Constitution. Since the object of Japan's constitutional regulations is Japan, Japan must become the protector of fundamental rights in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. The country or government or public power system of the protector of the fundamental rights of the Japanese here refers to the parliament, cabinet, administrative departments, courts, and local public organizations.
Since it is the Constitution of Japan, non-Japanese foreign governments that are not governed by the constitution are excluded from this category. In addition, even if a private person has great power to rival the state, he cannot become a protector of fundamental rights. Although some commentators have suggested, can fundamental rights not restrict private individuals? This is the question of the theory of effectiveness among private individuals, but it must be noted that the opposite of the above question is, can the protector of fundamental rights assert that it is the state? In this sense, the private effect theory of fundamental rights is a special discussion.
This paper will focus on the principle and exception diagram (1), three-stage review: protection, limitation, justification (2), fundamental rights protection areas: meaning, delineation, competition (4), fundamental rights limitation (5), protection The relationship between domains and restrictions, and the justification of restrictions: legal restrictions and restrictions based on laws, mandated legislation, retention of regulations, clarity of regulations, public welfare, proportional measurement methods and purposes, means, and review of the principle of proportionality Icon (6). Finally, I put forward the conclusion: review benchmarks, review density and dual benchmarks. |
