宪法视野下的日本“行使集体自卫权”问题

Japan's Attempt for Exercising the Right of Collective Self-defense from the Perspective of Japanese Constitution

安倍内阁在解禁日本"行使集体自卫权"问题上先后采取了两种法律方式:直接修宪和解释修宪。从宪法学和宪法实务的角度看,两种方式都存在诸多问题。直接修宪方式通过修改宪法第九条解禁"行使集体自卫权",将直接破坏《日本国宪法》的和平主义原理,同时还破坏了《日本国宪法》与《开罗宣言》、《波茨坦公告》、《联合国宪章》的法源位阶关系。解释修宪方式超越了内阁的宪法解释权限,并且内阁的宪法解释及其修正案不具有真正的法律效力,通过内阁会议形式修改宪法解释也无明确的法律依据。尽管法律层面上存在诸多问题,但综合当前日本国内政治、经济、社会以及国际局势等各方面因素看,解释修宪方式未来发生逆转的可能性越来越小。

Japanese Prime Minister Abe has adopted two different legal methods of lifting the ban on Japan＇ s exercising the right of collective self - defense, which are namely the direct revision of constitution and the revision of constitutional interpretation. From the perspective of constitutional law and practice, there are problems in both the two methods. The direct revision of constitution will definitely undermine the pacifist principle of Japan＇ s constitution and destroy the source status relationship between Japan＇ s constitution and international treaties such as the Cairo declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation and the United Nations Charter. Meanwhile, the revision of constitutional interpretation is beyond the power of the cabinet to interpret the constitution. In spite of many problem in legal terms, there will be more probability for Japan to attempt to exercise the right of Japan＇ s self - defense.