论文部分内容阅读
生命权作为一项重要且独立的基本权利本应首先在宪法中得以明确和保障。在我国却迟迟未能明确入宪,这就使得生命权在赔偿法律中的地位颇为尴尬,这样的尴尬反映到法律制度中就是损害生命权后进行赔偿时忽略了生命权本身的“无价”和至高无上。这样的矛盾要归因于没有将“命”、“价”分野,诚然,此“价”实际是从民事法律的层面对损害后果的救济和补偿,与此同时被侵害者生命已不复存在,救济的效果是在与死者有关的近亲属身上实现的。这样一来,可以看出因“同命同价”问题引发的巨大社会争议是无谓的。为了平息争议,更是为了重新审视生命权的内涵和重要性,“命”、“价”需要分野,更需要对生命权损害赔偿制度之意义的正确界定,这样才能完善生命权损害赔偿之立法。
As an important and independent fundamental right, the right to life should first be clearly defined and guaranteed in the Constitution. In our country, however, it has not been clearly defined in the constitution, which makes the status of life right in compensation law quite embarrassing. Such embarrassment reflects that in the legal system, the right to life is neglected after compensation for damages to the right to life. Priceless “and supreme. Such contradictions should be attributed to the fact that there is no distinction between ”life “ and ”price “. It is true that this ”price “ is actually infringed upon from the level of civil law for the relief and compensation for the consequences of the damage Life no longer exists, the effect of relief is to achieve the close relatives of the deceased. In this way, it can be seen that there is no need for a huge social controversy arising from the issue of ”same life and same price.“ In order to quell controversy, it is to re-examine the connotation and importance of the right to life, ”life“, ”price" need to be divided, but also need to correctly define the meaning of the system of compensation for the right to life in order to improve the right to life Legislation for damages.