人权保障视角下寻衅滋事兜底条款的合宪性解析

A Constitutional Analysis of the Trouble-making Provisions from the Perspective of Human Rights Protection

2019年轰动一时的“韦我独尊案”再次引起了社会各界对《中华人民共和国治安管理处罚法》(治安管理处罚法)寻衅滋事兜底条款存废的关注。该案应当借鉴德国宪法教义学的方法,通过公民基本权利保障的三阶段论进行再次论证。韦某朋友圈发图行为属于私人行为并带有虚构事实、哗众取宠性质,但仍落入宪法保护的公民言论自由范畴。柳州警方根据《治安管理处罚法》第26条第4项“其他寻衅滋事行为”兜底条款对韦某处以拘留,由于其不具备限制言论自由的“公共利益”强度要件,该案存在适用错误。我国实务部门扩大解释了“其他寻衅滋事行为”的标准与范围。对于公民权利具有严重侵害后果的兜底条款表述方式,存在极大的不确定性,违反了宪法之明确性原则,应予废止。

The sensational case of“Wei and Wu Xun”in 2019 has once again aroused attention from all walks of life to the existence and abolishment of the provocative and troublesome provisions of the Law on Public Security Management Punishments.The case should draw on the method of German constitutional doctrine to demonstrate again through the three-stage theory of the protection of citizens'basic rights.The behavior of Wei’s circle of friends is a private act with fictional facts and publicity,but still falls into the scope of civil freedom of speech protected by the Constitution.The case was detained in accordance with Article 26,paragraph 4,“Other provocative acts”of the“Policy on Public Security Administration Punishment”,because it did not have the“public interest”strength restrictions that restrict freedom of speech,and there were errors in the case.China’s practical department has expanded the standards and scope of“other provocative and provocative acts”.There are great uncertainties in the way in which the provisions of the civil rights have serious consequences,which violates the principle of clarity of the Constitution and should be abolished.