论宪法基本权利规范效力的二重性——基于德国“无效力说”等学理之审思

The Dual Nature of the Normative Validity of Basic Constitutional Rights:Reflections on the German Theory of Invalidity

从西方法学理论关于公、私法分野的经典论断,大致可推导出基本权利旨在有效对抗国家公权力的不法侵害。完全否认基本权利在处理私人间关系过程中蕴涵的价值摄入,构成德国传统宪法教义学“无效力说”的核心要义。然而,随着学理研究和司法实践的纵深发展,基本权利在私法关系中的适用问题愈发得到重视,并且进而引发公法学人针对基本权利的规范内涵展开系统审视。据此,有必要从理论基础层面破除“无效力说”仅仅强调基本权利主观面向的传统偏见,重新审思基本权利对第三人效力理论偏重客观面向的认知争论。通过考察基本权利规范内涵与功能之间的逻辑关联,可以推导出基本权利规范效力具备二重性特征,这成为现代中国宪法学研究不可轻易绕开的时代命题。

From the classical statements of the Western legal theories about the differentiation between the public and private laws,it can be roughly deduced that the basic rights are designed to effectively combat the illegal infringement of the state power;completely denying the value of the basic rights in the process of dealing with private relations constitutes the core of the traditional German constitutional doctrine of"invalidity". However,with the deepening development of academic research and judicial practice,more attention is paid to the application of the basic rights in private law relations,which has triggered public law scholars’ systematic review of the normative implications of the basic rights. Therefore,it is necessary,at the theoretical foundational level,to do away with the traditional prejudice of"invalidity"which only emphasizes the subjective orientation of the basic rights,and to reconsider the cognitive argument that the theory of the validity of the basic rights to the third party is objectively oriented.Examining the logical relationship between the normative implications and functions of the basic rights may deduce the dual nature of the basic rights’ normative validity. This is the proposition of the times that modern Chinese constitutional studies can hardly avoid.