论合宪推定不适用于我国合宪性审查  

On the Presumption of Constitutionality Can not be Applied to the Constitutional Review in China

作　　者：郑贤君[1] Zheng Xianjun(Capital Normal University,Beijing 100048,China)

机构地区：[1]首都师范大学政法学院,北京100048

出　　处：《贵州省党校学报》2021年第5期100-110,共11页Journal of Guizhou Provincial Party School

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目“合宪性审查标准的中国化与体系化”(项目批准号:19AFX005)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：合宪推定起源于美国特定的宪法时刻,是最高法院脆弱时期的一种司法退守,也是司法立宪主义之司法克制的体现。依托三权分立,通过推定经济和社会立法合宪,法院承认民主的立法机关享有干预市场的立法形成自由与裁量权。我国合宪性审查不同于合宪推定,民主集中制之人民代表大会制下的宪法监督服膺于“自我革命”,“民主集中制”不同于分权,“自律”不同于制衡之“他律”;最高国家权力机关的合宪性审查并非基于怀疑和不信任,而是出于“自我完善”的需要,目的是实现“良法善治”;我国合宪性审查程序不同于法院的诉讼程序,最高国家权力机关判断经济社会立法符合宪法是“自我肯定”,而非“合宪推定”。我国没有区分政治与经济社会立法的宪法传统,合宪推定之合理性基准不适用于对经济社会立法的合宪性审查,适合的审查方法是以尊重宪法、维护宪法秩序统一为鹄的,遵守“积极法律保留”,通过适用政治审查、严格合理性审查基准区别对待,分类审查,在正当化立法裁量与限制基本权必要性之间取得平衡,兼顾民主主义与个人自由双重价值。The presumption of constitutionality originated from a specific constitutional moment in the United States.It is not only a judicial retreat in the fragile period of the Supreme Court,but also the embodiment of the judicial restraint of judicial constitutionalism.Relying on the separation of powers and by presuming that the economic and social legislation is constitutional,the court recognizes that the Democratic legislature has the freedom and discretion to intervene in the market.China's constitutional review is different from the presumption of constitutionality;The constitutional supervision under the people's Congress system of democratic centralism is subject to“selfrevolution”.“Democratic centralism”is different from decentralization,“self-discipline”is different from“heteronomy”of checks and balances.The constitutional review of the supreme state power organ is not based on doubt and mistrust,but out of the need of“self-improvement”,with the purpose of realizing“good law and good governance”.China's constitutional review procedure is different from the court procedure.The supreme state power organ judges that the economic and social legislation conforms to the constitution as“self-affirmation”rather than“constitutional presumption”.China has no constitutional tradition of distinguishing political and economic and social legislation,and the rationality benchmark of constitutional presumption is not applicable to the constitutional review of economic and social legislation.The appropriate review method is to respect the Constitution and maintain the unity of constitutional order,and abide by the“positive law”,by applying the political test,strict and rational standard,differential treatment and classified review,we can strike a balance between the legitimate legislative discretion and the necessity of limiting basic rights,and take into account the dual values of democracy and individual freedom.

关 键 词：最高国家权力机关宪法监督 民主集中制经济社会立法 政治标准、严格与合理性基准 

分 类 号：D921[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]