摘要
港英政府时期已经适用于香港的国际人权公约如何在回归后"继续有效",是香港基本法起草过程中面临的立法难题。通过梳理《香港特别行政区基本法》起草过程中关于第39条的立法争议,可以发现立法意见提出了三类适用国际公约的方案:本土化、国际法化和以基本法吸纳。在对各类方案权衡的基础上,立法者采取了以基本法"原则吸纳"国际人权公约的方案,区分了实体性的权利创设权与程序性的保障监察。从国家主权的视野来看,第39条创设了香港居民的实体性权利,同时也为香港政府划定了权利保障的职能与边界。《香港特别行政区基本法》将公约的解释权部分授予特区法院,从而将国际人权公约的监察权内化为香港特区法院特定的司法监察模式。香港回归以来,香港法院人权判决的司法边界问题值得关注。
It was a Legislative difficulty how international human rights conventions during the drafting of Hong Kong Basic Law that ＂continue to be effective＂ which already have been applied during the British Hong Kong Government＇ period. By sorting out the legislative disputes under Article 39 of the Basic Law, this paper finds that the legislative opinions have proposed three types of proposals for the application of international conventions ： localization, international legalization, and absorption by the Basic Law. Based on the balance between the advantages and disadvantages of various types, legislators have adopted the proposal of ＂principal accepting＂ international human rights conventions to the Basic Law, distinguishing between substantive creation rights and procedural safeguards monitoring. Judging from the perspective of national sovereignty, Article 39 has played the function of constituent power, created the substantive rights of Hong Kong residents, and also delineated the functions and boundaries of the Hong Kong government to protect the rights. According to the constitutional right, the Basic Law grants part of the interpretative rights of these conventions to the court of the Special Administrative Region, thereby internalizing the monitoring powers of the international human rights conventions into the specific judicial supervision model of the court of Hong Kong. After the reunification, the judicial boundary of human rights judgment in Hong Kong court deserves vigilance.
出处
《人权》
2018年第3期99-116,共18页
Human Rights
