生存權的憲法規範與保障方式 : 檢討日本與美國學說及判例

機構典藏 > College of International Affairs > Graduate Institute of Japanese Studies > Thesis > Item 987654321/30752

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw/dspace/handle/987654321/30752

Title:	生存權的憲法規範與保障方式 : 檢討日本與美國學說及判例
Other Titles:	The constitutional norm and security of the right to a decent life : analysis of the theories and judicial practice in the Japan and United States
Authors:	鄭明政;Cheng, Ming-cheng
Contributors:	淡江大學日本研究所碩士班許慶雄;Hsu, Ching-hsiung
Keywords:	尊嚴;具體請求權;權利救濟;階段性;違憲審查基準;雙重基準論;Dignity;Concrete Right;Rights and Remedy;Step by Step;Standards of Judicial Review;Double Standard Theory;違憲審査基準;二重の基準論;尊厳;段階性;具体的請求権;権利救済
Date:	2006
Issue Date:	2010-01-10 23:56:00 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	社會權已為現代憲法所不可獲缺的基本人權之一，而居其核心的當為生存權，常為福祉國家的重要基盤。然而，對於生存權的權利內涵和裁判規範性等，卻因論者不同而有相異的認識，使得生存權的保障有了根本性的不同，甚至產生了反對將生存權入憲的主張。目前學界通說多以「抽象權利說」為主流，對於生存權的實踐主要還是要求必須要有下位法規的具體化才得以實踐。然而生存權若為一基本權，且又明定於憲法之上，當應具有實效的救濟機能，否則不能救濟之權利只能說是種恩惠或是種反射性的法益，留於憲法典中只會有損憲法的威嚴甚至相對弱化了其他基本權的權利性。因此，基於有權利必有救濟的思維下，本文對於生存權的法理念、權利論、違憲審查基準、保障方式之問題等進行研究，援引日本和美國的學說及判例，期以對比出生存權入憲的必要性以及其妥當的憲法解釋和保障方式，以求符合生存權的憲法意旨。以下就主要章節內容說明提要：　　第二章主要是論述生存權的法理念。從權利概念的形成到實定法化的實現過程可以看出生存權為現代資本主義國家所欲追求和諧所不可獲缺的權利。而分析其權利構造可以發現與傳統的自然法一樣，都是立基於自由、平等等理念以實踐整個人性尊嚴，故生存權為今日追求公平、正義社會所必需要有的「基本」人權之一。　　第三章為生存權的權利論。分別檢討日本學界的三個生存權學說理論，分析其問題點以還原憲法上的生存權所應具備的法的性格。並對無生存權條項的美國憲法進行了解，明白美國學界如何建構獨自的生存權（福祉受給權）理論，以及無憲法依據下所面臨的困境，從而論證出生存權「具體權利說」的妥當性，以及相關救濟手法。同時著眼於社會權階段性本質，嘗試解釋生存權的基礎內涵。　　第四章為生存權的違憲審查基準。以具體權利說的立場分別對日美相關生存權訴訟的違憲審查基準進行檢討分析，除了解法院對於立法裁量的濫用外，試圖依生存權的權利層次提出妥當的審查基準。而對於違憲審查基準中的「雙重基準論」常導致生存權歸結於社會經濟立法的範疇，而使司法審查不具機能，進一步來質疑人權序列價值的正確性。　　第五章針對立法、行政、司法三權保障生存權的問題點進行檢討，認為立法府對於最低限度生存權保障應無立法裁量空間。司法府基於憲法守護者以及人權擁護者（特別是少數者）的憲法角色，有義務視個案情況來判別介入程度，對於攸關生命與尊嚴的最低生活保障受侵害時，則不無有直接課予立法義務、行政給付等積極性判決的可能性。而行政府在行政過程中的適正程序、行政的自我統治，以及國民的行政統制也應強化。　　故，生存權為現今人類解放過程中所必要之基本要求，乃為一具體的、主觀性公權利。 Social rights may be said to become an indispensable part in a modern constitution. It is “right to a decent life”, the core of social rights always become the base of the welfare state. However, the right to a decent lfie article, it is surely established to Article 25 of the Constitution of Japan（all people shall have the the right to maintain the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living）and Republic of China (Taiwan) Constitution Article15, but it is doubt that the right to a decent life is really protected as fundamental rights? In face, there are different opinions by different scholars.（There have been three theories：Programmatic Declaration Theory, Abstract Right Theory, Concrete Right Theory）It also make the security of the right to a decent life become very difference, some scholares even objection to the right to a decent life as constituional right. Today, general opinion is Abstract Right Theory, but the practice of this theory need to law level legislation, if the right to a decent life seems not a fundamental right it just likes privilege or reflective benefit. Such this right in constituion, the fudamental rights will be damaged and break the legal nature of these rights. Therefore, stand on the principle that rights must be remedied, so from this view, this thesis deals with （in chapter 2）development of legal philosophy of the right to a decent life, （in chapter 3）the legal nature of the right to a decent life,（in chapter 4）standards of constitionality of the right to a decent life ,（in chapter 5）the method of national power security etc. Analysis of these theories and judical practice in the Japan and United States maybe help us to understand the right to a decent life is a essentail right of constitution and try to find appropriate constitution explanation.
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Japanese Studies] Thesis

Files in This Item:

File	Size	Format
	0Kb	Unknown	422	View/Open

Loading...