论文部分内容阅读
在违宪审查的论域内,法律明确性要求的宪法规范依据在于罪刑法定、正当程序等宪法条款或原则;而我国宪法第5条关于建设法治国家的规定及第33条关于国家尊重和保障人权的规定是法律明确性原则的中国宪法文本依据。法律明确性原则审查标准的确定至少应遵循如下两项基本规则:一是规制事务领域的不同决定了判断立场和判断尺度的差异;二是受众的立场与审查权的裁量之间的相互协调。然而,基于审查标准的不明确、法律的模糊性特征及法解释技术的运用,法律明确性原则在违宪审查实践中的作用空间是十分“狭窄”的。
In the field of constitutional review, the constitutional norms of legal clarity require that constitutional provisions or principles such as the statutory and due process of crimes and punishments; and Article 5 of China’s Constitution on the construction of a state under the rule of law and Article 33 of the Constitution on the state’s respect for and protection of human rights Provisions are the basis of Chinese constitutional texts on the principle of legal clarity. The principle of legal clarity of the review criteria to determine at least the following two basic rules should be followed: First, the different areas of regulatory affairs decided to judge the difference between the position and the yardstick; Second, the position of the audience and the discretion of the review of the coordination between. However, due to the ambiguity of examination standards, the fuzziness of law and the application of legal interpretation techniques, the role of legal clarity in the practice of unconstitutional review is very “narrow”.