论文部分内容阅读
“人是生而自由的,却无往不在枷锁之中”。按照卢梭的观点,在一个真正发展成熟的政体中,每个公民的意志都消融在“公意”中,公意是每个公民个体意志的体现,同时也在一定程度上限制了个人的自由。在《论犯罪与刑法》中,贝卡利亚也认为,公民将自己的一部分自由交出来,是为了更好地享受剩下那部分自由。相较之下卢氏与贝氏的观点不无相似。个体的尊严、人性与国家公权力的制衡较量、法律制度在国家结构中的地位与作用、司法追诉中的程序正义与实体正义的辩证统一,关于国家政体的话题永远都是法学家们热议的内容。2012年3月14日新刑诉修正案的通过,又一次激起了人们对于保护人权与限制国家公权力的大讨论。本文拟从西方法学思想中汲取灵感,尝试分析我国国情下的公民与国家公权力的微妙关系,用较为专业的方法为其下一个相对合理的定义。
“People are born free, but never in the shackles ”. In Rousseau’s view, in a truly sophisticated regime, the will of each citizen ablates in “public opinion ”, which is the embodiment of the individual will of each citizen and at the same time limits to a certain extent the individual freedom of. In On Crime and Criminal Law, Beccaria also believes that citizens free up part of their own part in order to better enjoy the remaining part of freedom. In contrast, Romer and Bayesian’s view is not without any similarity. The dignity of the individual, the balance of human rights and the balance of power of the state public authority, the status and role of the legal system in the state structure, the dialectical unity of procedural justice and substantive justice in judicial prosecution, and the topic of state polity is always heated by jurists Content. The passage of the new Criminal Appeal on March 14, 2012 once again aroused people’s discussion on protecting human rights and restricting the public power of the state. This article intends to draw inspiration from the western jurisprudence, trying to analyze the subtle relationship between citizens and the state public power in our national conditions, with a more professional method for its next relatively reasonable definition.