基本权利释义学体系初探——基本权利研究之方法论批判

摘要

The main nature of fundamental rights research has blurred the scope and the limitation be- tween disciplines, thus resulting in the deviation from legal methodology. Interpretation of fundamental rights is focused on norm finding which follows the general theories to determine the meaning of fundamental rights by referring to some doctrines and depending on domestic constitutional concepts. Fundamental rights interpreta- tion is somewhat neutral and to some extent escapes from political reality. A wall between politic and academic action has been established which contains double risks in ensuring the safety for both politic and academic ac- tion, and borrowing much more from general theories and overseas thoughts are likely to affect the localization degree of fundamental rights, thus making it a closed system far from political reality. In order to overcome such risks, it is necessary to promote fundamental rights to be localized by remedying the shortage within sys- tem research based on using other social science methods and entrenching the ＂rights are consistent with obli- gation mutually＂ as the basic principle of interoretation.%早期基本权利研究的突出特点是模糊学科之间的范围与界限,导致相对于法学的方法偏离。基本权利释义学是一个致力于规范含义发现的解释事业,是在遵循基本权利普遍原理的前提下,参考特定学说,依据本国概念,服从宪法解释方法确定基本权利含义。基本权利释义学具有相对的中立性,一定程度上规避了政治现实。这一规避在政治与学术之间树起了一道墙,在确保政治与学术安全的同时蕴涵着双重风险,即过多借用普遍性原理或者域外理论有可能影响基本权利的本地化程度及僵化基本权利,使其成为远离政治现实的封闭体系。为克服这些风险,应促使基本权利概念的本地化,通过外弛弥补体系化的内证之不足,确立权利义务相一致为基本的解释原则。