古典自然法学派财产权建构的两条路径及其启示

Two Approaches to the Construction of Property Rights in Classical Natural Law School and Their Enlightenments

古典自然法学派是最早探讨财产权建构的法学流派。其内部的建构逻辑呈现出两条路径:一条是以格老秀斯、洛克为代表的"自然权利论",另一条是以霍布斯、卢梭为代表的"主权权利论"。它们是理解近代西方国家宪法财产权条款的两个有用的分析框架。我国现行宪法的财产权条款在总体上呈现出两条路径交汇的特点,这在一定意义上也造成了我国宪法的财产权条款与社会主义条款之间的张力。而调和的方式似乎是对两类条款的分别应用。未来我国在建构财产权时应继续沿着"主权权利论"的路径前进,从实定法的角度出发,为财产权构建一个更为坚实的基础;与此同时,在对具体内容的规定方面,应当更多地借鉴"自然权利论"的理念,对公民私有财产予以更全面细致的保护。

The classical natural law school is the first legal school to explore the construction of proper- ty rights. Its internal construction logic takes two paths： one is the ＂natural right theory＂ represented by Grotius and Locke; the other is ＂sovereign right theory＂ represented by Hobbes and Rousseau. Both can be used as a comprehending framework for us to understand the provisions of property rights in the capitalist constitutions and in the socialist constitutions, it＇s worth noting that the clauses of property rights in China＇s current constitution are also affected by both, which in a certain sense also caused the tension between clau- ses of property rights and the socialist terms in our current constitution. The harmonizing approach seems to be a separate application of the two kinds of terms. Therefore, China should continue the path of ＂sovereign rights＂ to build a basic framework for the construction of property rights from the perspective of the substan- tive law in the future. At the same time, in the specific provisions of the content of , in order to provide more comprehensive and meticulous protection to our citizens＇ earnings in the socialist market economy en- vironment. At the same time, when designing specific regulations of property rights, We should refer more to ＂natural rights theory＂, in order to provide more comprehensive and detailed protection of citizens＇ pri- vate property rights.