现代权利理论争论程序性解决方案的贡献与缺憾——与彭诚信程序性权利观商榷  

Contributions and Defects of the Procedural Solution to the Debates among Modern Theories of Rights-On Peng Chengxin's Procedural Theory of Rights

作　　者：张玉洁 ZHANG Yujie(School of Administrative Law,Southwest University of Political Science&Law,Chongqing 401120,China)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学行政法学院,重庆401120

出　　处：《上海大学学报（社会科学版）》2021年第3期60-72,共13页Journal of Shanghai University(Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：重庆市社会科学规划项目(2019BS112);西南政法大学2018年度校级科研资助项目(E-6501-18-00063-0103);教育部哲学社会科学重大攻关项目(18JZ036);国家社会科学基金重点项目(17AFX011)。

摘　　要：彭诚信在其《现代权利理论研究:基于“意志理论”与“利益理论”的评析》一书中提出的程序性权利观,是对以意志理论和利益理论为代表的现代权利理论深刻反思的结果。这一新型权利理论具有从实体性关涉到程序性关涉的研究视角与范式转换的重大意义,解决了现代权利理论难以拓展解释公法权利现象和权利在立法、司法及执法环节中的不同样态的问题。程序性权利观也存在一些缺憾,尤其是无法摆脱对权利实体性问题的追问,在实践中呈现为一种综合意志理论和利益理论的尝试,却事实上无法弥合两者之间的深层哲学裂痕。因此,程序性权利观或许无法完成其超越现代权利理论的历史使命。The Procedural Theory of Rights was proposed by Professor Peng Chengxin in his book Modern Theoretical Studies of Rights,which is the outcome of profound reflections on modern theories of rights represented especially by the Will Theory and the Interest Theory.The Procedural Theory of Rights is of great significance in perspective and paradigm shift from substantive concern to procedural concern.In addition,it provides explanations to the diverse forms of public rights and rights phenomena in law-making,adjudicative and administrative activities,while modern theories of rights have failed to explain.However,the Procedural Theory of Rights has its own defects in that it cannot answer the questions related to the entities of rights.It appears to be a practical attempt in integrating the Will Theory and the Interest Theory,but in effect it can hardly patch up the deep philosophical rifts between the two.In this regard,it is difficult for the Procedural Theory of Rights to realize its historical mission of transcending modern theories of rights.

关 键 词：现代权利理论争论 意志理论 利益理论 实体性权利观 程序性权利观 

分 类 号：DF51[政治法律—民商法学]