施米特的挑战与格罗斯的回应——基于国家紧急权理论的视角

Schmitt's Challenge and Gross's Response:from the Perspective of Theory of State Emergency Powers

施米特是20世纪德国著名的公法学家和政治思想家之一,以解释魏玛宪法第48条的总统紧急权条款而广为人知。基于魏玛宪法第48条内容及其实践的分析,他断言,应对与处置威胁国家存亡的例外状态必须授予处置危机者以绝对的、不受任何规范约束与限制的紧急权即主权;自由民主政制不可能在动用紧急权与维护法治之间保持一致。"9.11"事件之后布什政府在"反恐战争"中动用紧急权而导致侵犯人权与破坏法治的后果被批评为弥漫着施米特"幽灵"而激发了许多学者对紧急权问题的争论。在批评其它理论模式和挖掘洛克特权理论等理论资源的基础上,格罗斯提出了法外模式试图对施米特的挑战作出回应,但其努力最终陷入困境。完全消除紧急权与法治之间的张力是不可能的,因此,施米特的指责过于苛刻,格罗斯的回应陷入困境也是必然的。

Carl Schmitt,a famous German specialist in public law and political thinker,is well-known for his explanation of the presidential emergency power in Article 48 of the Weimar Constitution.Based on the analysis of the content and practice of Article 48,he asserts that in order to cope with the state of exception threatening the survival of a state,the person disposing the crisis must be empowered with the sovereignty which is not restricted by any norm.He also claims that it is impossible for a government of liberal democracies to execute the emergency power in accordance with the rule of law.After＂9.11＂ event,Bush government has exercised the emergency powers in ＂Anti-Terrorism War＂and has violated the civil right and law.Some people say it is Schmitt＇s ＂spirit＂that has led to the consequences,which has evoked heated debates on the emergency powers.On the basis of criticizing other theoretical models of emergency powers and analyzing Locke＇s privilege theory,Gross proposes the Extra-legal Measures model to make a response to Schmitt＇s challenge,but lands himself in predicament in the end.To eliminate completely the clash between emergency powers and rules of law is impossible,so Schmitt＇s criticism is too harsh and Gross is bound to find himself in a tight corner.