论基本权利的本质内涵保障--以终身监禁为例  

On the Protection of Essence and Connotation of Basic Rights--Take Life Imprisonment as an Example

作　　者：王锴[1] Wang Kai

机构地区：[1]北京航空航天大学法学院

出　　处：《法学》2024年第9期50-63,共14页Law Science

摘　　要：基本权利的本质内涵使得基本权利具有了一个国家权力不能触及的核心,一旦触及本质内涵即意味着公民丧失了行使该项基本权利的可能性。国家对公民基本权利的限制不能导致公民彻底失去基本权利。基本权利的本质内涵不同于比例原则,它是受到绝对保护而无法在个案中进行权衡的。基本权利的本质内涵保障和比例原则都是国家限制公民基本权利的宪法正当化条件,但两者在逻辑上有先后之别,本质内涵保障是解决能否限制的问题,而比例原则是解决如何限制的问题。通过对国内外终身监禁的比较可以得出,德国和欧洲人权法院对终身监禁的合宪性采取了本质内涵保障审查,而美国采取比例原则审查的后果就是,只能判断个别类型的犯罪判处终身监禁是否合宪,但无法从根本上对终身监禁本身的合宪性进行反思,从而导致终身监禁的泛滥。我国的终身监禁不得假释、减刑,从目前来看适用特赦的情形也很少,对人身自由的本质内涵保障不利,有必要通过相关的合宪性改进来为判处终身监禁的罪犯保留未来行使人身自由的可能性,从而符合《宪法》第28条规定的惩办和改造犯罪分子并重的刑罚目的。The essential content of fundamental rights makes them a core that cannot be touched by state power.Touching the essential content means that citizens lose the possibility of exercising their fundamental rights.The restriction of citizens'fundamental rights by the state cannot lead to the complete loss of their fundamental rights.The essential content of fundamental rights is different from the principle of proportionality,as it is absolutely protected and cannot be balanced in a case.The essential content guarantee of fundamental rights and the principle of proportionality are both constitutional legitimization conditions for the state to restrict citizens'fundamental rights,but there is a logical difference between the two.The essential content guarantee is to solve the problem of whether it can be restricted,while the principle of proportionality is to solve the problem of how to restrict it.By comparing life imprisonment at home and abroad,it can be concluded that Germany and the European Court of Human Rights have adopted an essential content guarantee review in the constitutionality of life imprisonment,while the United States has adopted a proportional principle review,which can only judge whether the sentencing of life imprisonment for certain types of crimes is constitutional,but cannot reflect on the constitutionality of life imprisonment itself,leading to the proliferation of life imprisonment.Life imprisonment in our country does not allow parole or commutation,and currently there are few cases where amnesty is applied,which is not conducive to the protection of the essential content of personal freedom.It is necessary to improve the constitutionality of the relevant provisions to reserve the possibility of exercising personal freedom for criminals sentenced to life imprisonment in the future,in order to comply with the punishment purpose of both punishing and reforming criminals as stipulated in Article 28 of the Constitution.

关 键 词：基本权利 本质内涵 比例原则 终身监禁 

分 类 号：D921[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]