摘要
作为西方法律文化的产物 ,constitutionalcivilrights有其独特的自然法背景。本文通过对西方法律思想史、宪法史和美国最高法院司法实务见解的梳理与综合分析 ,认为将constitutionalcivilrights译为“公民权利”属于误读 ,它混淆了依据人的属性和依据公民资格而获得的权利之间的道德区别。应将其译为“私人权利” ,明确这一权利体系的前国家与超国家特征 ,使其区别于实证法律传统之下个人依赖作为政治社会成员资格所享有的公民权利 ,并区分宪法权利与民事权利之间的差异。在法官的解释下 ,constitutionalcivilrights还呈现出开放特性 ,是一个能够感应时代变化的、发展的权利体系。
As a result of western legal culture, the constitutional civil rights has special background of natural law. Through synthetic analyzing about the history of western legal thought, constitutional history and judicial opinion of American Supreme Court, the author thinks that it is misreading to translate the constitutional civil rights as citizen's rights, it confuses the distinction between rights based on the human nature and rights founded on citizenship. Translating civil rights as private rights will make clear the nature of prior state and super-state of rights, in order to distinct from the citizen's rights that person depend on citizenship which subject to one political society under the tradition of pragmatic jurisprudence, and distinct the differences between constitutional rights and civil rights. By construction of judge, the constitutional civil rights is open and also a rights system that could develop and respond to change of time.
出处
《首都师范大学学报（社会科学版）》
2004年第4期47-56,共10页
Journal of Capital Normal University：Social Science Edition
