辩护权与受益权的划分与结合:以审判权与表决权为中心

Z. Yi
{"title":"辩护权与受益权的划分与结合:以审判权与表决权为中心","authors":"Z. Yi","doi":"10.21592/eucj.2023.41.201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The right to defense means the right to demand the omission or cessation of an act of external aggression by the state against the freedoms presupposed thereon. Depending on the type of freedom that is the premise of the right of defence, the state’s external aggression against it also differs in its type. An aggression against freedom of action appears as an aggression that hinders or deters the action; an aggression against freedom of state appears as an aggression that interferes with or intervenes in a certain state, in particular, an aggression against a legal status where a certain legal status is guaranteed appears as an aggression that deprives the legal status. Thus, the right to defense includes requesting the omission or suspension of the imposition of a legal obligation to hinder or deter a specific act, the legal involvement to interfere with or intervene in a specific state, and the legislation depriving a specific legal status. Unlike the right to defense, which can demand negative action from the state, the right to defense is distinct from the right to benefit, which can demand positive action from the state. The positive actions that can be demanded from the state according to these rights to benefit are essentially legislative, and according to the content of these legislations, the types of the right to benefit are classified into protection rights, procedural rights, and social rights. Restrictions on the right to defense that can demand negative actions are made in the form of positive actions, and restrictions on the right to benefit that can demand positive actions are made in the form of negative actions. Therefore, the principle of proportionality, which is a constitutional principle required for the restriction of constitutional rights, is embodied in the principle of prohibition of excessively abundance and the principle of prohibition of excessively deficiency according to the type of restriction on constitutional rights. Both the prohibition of excessively abundance and the prohibition of excessively deficiency contain four parts of the proportionality principle. And the principle of balance of legal interests, which is the core principle of the principle of proportionality, becomes the most essential partial principle while justifying restrictions on constitutional rights when applying the principle of prohibition of excessively abundance or the principle of prohibition of excessively deficiency.","PeriodicalId":232789,"journal":{"name":"European Constitutional Law Association","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Division and Combination of Right to Defense and Right to Benefit: Focusing on Right to Trial and Right to Vote\",\"authors\":\"Z. Yi\",\"doi\":\"10.21592/eucj.2023.41.201\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The right to defense means the right to demand the omission or cessation of an act of external aggression by the state against the freedoms presupposed thereon. Depending on the type of freedom that is the premise of the right of defence, the state’s external aggression against it also differs in its type. An aggression against freedom of action appears as an aggression that hinders or deters the action; an aggression against freedom of state appears as an aggression that interferes with or intervenes in a certain state, in particular, an aggression against a legal status where a certain legal status is guaranteed appears as an aggression that deprives the legal status. Thus, the right to defense includes requesting the omission or suspension of the imposition of a legal obligation to hinder or deter a specific act, the legal involvement to interfere with or intervene in a specific state, and the legislation depriving a specific legal status. Unlike the right to defense, which can demand negative action from the state, the right to defense is distinct from the right to benefit, which can demand positive action from the state. The positive actions that can be demanded from the state according to these rights to benefit are essentially legislative, and according to the content of these legislations, the types of the right to benefit are classified into protection rights, procedural rights, and social rights. Restrictions on the right to defense that can demand negative actions are made in the form of positive actions, and restrictions on the right to benefit that can demand positive actions are made in the form of negative actions. Therefore, the principle of proportionality, which is a constitutional principle required for the restriction of constitutional rights, is embodied in the principle of prohibition of excessively abundance and the principle of prohibition of excessively deficiency according to the type of restriction on constitutional rights. Both the prohibition of excessively abundance and the prohibition of excessively deficiency contain four parts of the proportionality principle. And the principle of balance of legal interests, which is the core principle of the principle of proportionality, becomes the most essential partial principle while justifying restrictions on constitutional rights when applying the principle of prohibition of excessively abundance or the principle of prohibition of excessively deficiency.\",\"PeriodicalId\":232789,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Constitutional Law Association\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Constitutional Law Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21592/eucj.2023.41.201\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Constitutional Law Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21592/eucj.2023.41.201","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

辩护权是指要求国家不采取或停止对其所假定的自由的外部侵略行为的权利。根据作为自卫权前提的自由的类型,国家对自卫权的外部侵略也有不同的类型。对行动自由的侵犯表现为妨碍或阻止该行动的侵犯;对国家自由的侵略表现为干涉或干涉某一国家的侵略,特别是对某一法律地位得到保障的法律地位的侵略表现为剥夺该法律地位的侵略。因此,辩护权包括请求不执行或暂停执行阻碍或阻止特定行为的法律义务,请求对特定国家进行干涉或干预的法律介入,以及要求立法剥夺特定法律地位。与要求国家采取消极行动的辩护权不同,辩护权不同于要求国家采取积极行动的受益权。根据这些受益权可以要求国家采取的积极行动本质上是立法的,根据这些立法的内容,受益权的类型可以分为保护性权利、程序性权利和社会性权利。对要求采取消极行动的辩护权的限制以积极行动的形式进行,对要求采取积极行动的受益权的限制以消极行动的形式进行。因此,比例原则作为限制宪法权利所必需的宪法原则,根据限制宪法权利的类型,具体体现为禁止过多原则和禁止过度不足原则。禁止过盈和禁止过亏都包含了比例原则的四个部分。而法定利益平衡原则作为比例原则的核心原则,在适用禁止过盈原则或禁止过缺原则时,成为对宪法权利限制正当性的最重要的部分原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Division and Combination of Right to Defense and Right to Benefit: Focusing on Right to Trial and Right to Vote
The right to defense means the right to demand the omission or cessation of an act of external aggression by the state against the freedoms presupposed thereon. Depending on the type of freedom that is the premise of the right of defence, the state’s external aggression against it also differs in its type. An aggression against freedom of action appears as an aggression that hinders or deters the action; an aggression against freedom of state appears as an aggression that interferes with or intervenes in a certain state, in particular, an aggression against a legal status where a certain legal status is guaranteed appears as an aggression that deprives the legal status. Thus, the right to defense includes requesting the omission or suspension of the imposition of a legal obligation to hinder or deter a specific act, the legal involvement to interfere with or intervene in a specific state, and the legislation depriving a specific legal status. Unlike the right to defense, which can demand negative action from the state, the right to defense is distinct from the right to benefit, which can demand positive action from the state. The positive actions that can be demanded from the state according to these rights to benefit are essentially legislative, and according to the content of these legislations, the types of the right to benefit are classified into protection rights, procedural rights, and social rights. Restrictions on the right to defense that can demand negative actions are made in the form of positive actions, and restrictions on the right to benefit that can demand positive actions are made in the form of negative actions. Therefore, the principle of proportionality, which is a constitutional principle required for the restriction of constitutional rights, is embodied in the principle of prohibition of excessively abundance and the principle of prohibition of excessively deficiency according to the type of restriction on constitutional rights. Both the prohibition of excessively abundance and the prohibition of excessively deficiency contain four parts of the proportionality principle. And the principle of balance of legal interests, which is the core principle of the principle of proportionality, becomes the most essential partial principle while justifying restrictions on constitutional rights when applying the principle of prohibition of excessively abundance or the principle of prohibition of excessively deficiency.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信