韓國(guó)憲法訴愿制度的理論與實(shí)踐解析
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-12-19 20:29
【摘要】： 在現(xiàn)代違憲審查制度中,作為直接保護(hù)公民憲法權(quán)利的憲法訴愿制度為個(gè)人面對(duì)國(guó)家尋求直接的基本權(quán)利救濟(jì)提供了有效的機(jī)制,也對(duì)維持憲法秩序發(fā)揮了重要的作用,已經(jīng)引起了廣泛關(guān)注。而韓國(guó)作為第一個(gè)將憲法裁判制度,尤其是憲法訴愿制度引進(jìn)亞洲的國(guó)家,在這些年的發(fā)展中也已取得了顯著的成效。作為地緣相近,文化相似的中國(guó),對(duì)韓國(guó)這一制度的研究具有理論和實(shí)踐意義。 韓國(guó)的“憲法訴愿制度”是由1987年第6共和國(guó)修訂憲法首次引入,并在《韓國(guó)憲法裁判所法》第68條至75條中規(guī)定,是憲法裁判所的五大功能之一。在韓國(guó),憲法訴愿是指在公權(quán)力侵害國(guó)民基本權(quán)利時(shí),憲法裁判所通過(guò)憲法訴訟程序,保障公民基本權(quán)利的憲法裁判制度。憲法訴愿的裁判機(jī)關(guān)是憲法裁判所。憲法訴愿制度具有保障國(guó)民基本權(quán)利,使被侵害的基本權(quán)利得以救濟(jì)的本質(zhì),除此之外,其還具有維持憲法秩序、守護(hù)憲法的功能,并在實(shí)效和程序上特別強(qiáng)調(diào)這兩種功能的均衡。 根據(jù)《憲法裁判所法》第68條,韓國(guó)憲法訴愿制度按其性質(zhì)可分為兩種,一種是基本權(quán)被公權(quán)力侵害而請(qǐng)求的權(quán)利救濟(jì)型憲法訴愿,第二種是違憲法律的提請(qǐng)被法院否決的情況下,由提請(qǐng)申請(qǐng)人請(qǐng)求的違憲審查型憲法訴愿。憲法訴愿的審判對(duì)象主要是,韓國(guó)憲法上保護(hù)的基本權(quán)被公權(quán)力侵害時(shí),該公權(quán)力的行使和不行使。具體分為立法權(quán),行政權(quán),司法權(quán),統(tǒng)治行為等。 20年來(lái),韓國(guó)憲法裁判所為保護(hù)韓國(guó)國(guó)民基本權(quán)和為建立良好的憲法秩序而設(shè)立的憲法訴愿制度發(fā)揮了巨大的作用。作為一個(gè)憲政后發(fā)國(guó)家,無(wú)論從案件數(shù)量還是勝訴率,韓國(guó)是這一制度都堪比其他憲政發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家,體現(xiàn)了其優(yōu)越性和可借鑒性。 同時(shí),由于韓國(guó)憲法訴愿制度還存在理論方面和運(yùn)行過(guò)程的不足,對(duì)于沒(méi)有明確規(guī)定的領(lǐng)域已經(jīng)引起了學(xué)界爭(zhēng)議。第一,憲法訴愿審查對(duì)象的范圍中具有一定的爭(zhēng)議,包括對(duì)憲法規(guī)范和憲法裁判所裁決的憲法訴愿是否認(rèn)定,對(duì)法院裁判的憲法訴愿是否認(rèn)定,對(duì)檢察機(jī)關(guān)的起訴決定是否認(rèn)定,以及對(duì)統(tǒng)治行為的憲法訴愿是否認(rèn)定等;第二,憲法訴愿的補(bǔ)充性原則是否應(yīng)當(dāng)以法律明文的方式予以認(rèn)可,以及是否承認(rèn)其例外;第三,是否用法律明文認(rèn)可“假處分”決定等。 本文的意義在于詳細(xì)介紹韓國(guó)憲法訴愿制度,研究其理論框架、功能價(jià)值,形式效力,并整理實(shí)際運(yùn)行中存在的問(wèn)題,力求在研究學(xué)習(xí)的基礎(chǔ)上提供一定的借鑒意義。
[Abstract]:In the modern unconstitutional review system, as a direct protection of citizens' constitutional rights, the constitutional appeal system provides an effective mechanism for individuals to seek direct relief of basic rights in the face of the state, and also plays an important role in maintaining the constitutional order. Has aroused widespread concern. Korea, as the first country to introduce the constitutional adjudication system, especially the constitutional appeal system, has achieved remarkable results in the development of these years. As a geographically similar and culturally similar China, the study of Korea's system has theoretical and practical significance. The constitutional appeal system of Korea was first introduced by the 6th Republic of 1987, which was amended by the Constitution, and stipulated in articles 68 to 75 of the Korean Constitutional Court Law, which is one of the five functions of the Constitutional Court. In Korea, constitutional appeal refers to the constitutional adjudication system which guarantees citizens' basic rights through constitutional litigation procedure when public power infringes on national basic rights. The judicial organ of constitutional appeal is the constitutional court. The constitutional appeal system has the essence of protecting the basic rights of the people and making the infringed basic rights remedy. In addition, it also has the function of maintaining the constitutional order and guarding the constitution. And in the actual effect and the procedure specially emphasizes these two kinds of function the balance. According to Article 68 of the Constitutional Adjudication Law, the Korean constitutional appeal system can be divided into two types according to its nature, one is the right relief appeal that the basic right is infringed upon by the public power. The second is the unconstitutional constitutional appeal, which is requested by the applicant if the petition for unconstitutional law is rejected by the court. The trial object of constitutional appeal is that when the basic right protected by the constitution of Korea is infringed by public power, the public power is exercised and not exercised. Specifically divided into legislative power, executive power, judicial power, governance and so on. Over the past 20 years, the constitutional appeal system established by the Korean Constitutional Court to protect the basic rights of Korean nationals and to establish a good constitutional order has played a great role. As a post-constitutional country, whether from the number of cases or the rate of success, Korea is the system can be compared with other constitutional developed countries, which embodies its superiority and can be used for reference. At the same time, due to the deficiencies in theory and operation of the constitutional appeal system in South Korea, there has been controversy in the field which has not been clearly stipulated. First, there are certain disputes in the scope of the object of review of the constitutional appeal, including the determination of the constitutional norms and the constitutional judgment of the constitutional appeal, the determination of the constitutional appeal against the court decision, and the determination of the constitutional appeal against the court. Whether the prosecution decision of the procuratorial organ is recognized, and whether the constitutional appeal of the ruling act is recognized or not; Second, whether the supplementary principle of constitutional appeal should be recognized in the form of legal express, and whether to admit the exception; third, whether to explicitly approve the decision of "false disposition" by law. The significance of this paper is to introduce the appeal system of the constitution of Korea in detail, to study its theoretical framework, function value, formal effect, and to sort out the problems existing in the actual operation, and to provide some reference significance on the basis of the study and study.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：延邊大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：DD911;D931.26
本文編號(hào)：2387410
[Abstract]:In the modern unconstitutional review system, as a direct protection of citizens' constitutional rights, the constitutional appeal system provides an effective mechanism for individuals to seek direct relief of basic rights in the face of the state, and also plays an important role in maintaining the constitutional order. Has aroused widespread concern. Korea, as the first country to introduce the constitutional adjudication system, especially the constitutional appeal system, has achieved remarkable results in the development of these years. As a geographically similar and culturally similar China, the study of Korea's system has theoretical and practical significance. The constitutional appeal system of Korea was first introduced by the 6th Republic of 1987, which was amended by the Constitution, and stipulated in articles 68 to 75 of the Korean Constitutional Court Law, which is one of the five functions of the Constitutional Court. In Korea, constitutional appeal refers to the constitutional adjudication system which guarantees citizens' basic rights through constitutional litigation procedure when public power infringes on national basic rights. The judicial organ of constitutional appeal is the constitutional court. The constitutional appeal system has the essence of protecting the basic rights of the people and making the infringed basic rights remedy. In addition, it also has the function of maintaining the constitutional order and guarding the constitution. And in the actual effect and the procedure specially emphasizes these two kinds of function the balance. According to Article 68 of the Constitutional Adjudication Law, the Korean constitutional appeal system can be divided into two types according to its nature, one is the right relief appeal that the basic right is infringed upon by the public power. The second is the unconstitutional constitutional appeal, which is requested by the applicant if the petition for unconstitutional law is rejected by the court. The trial object of constitutional appeal is that when the basic right protected by the constitution of Korea is infringed by public power, the public power is exercised and not exercised. Specifically divided into legislative power, executive power, judicial power, governance and so on. Over the past 20 years, the constitutional appeal system established by the Korean Constitutional Court to protect the basic rights of Korean nationals and to establish a good constitutional order has played a great role. As a post-constitutional country, whether from the number of cases or the rate of success, Korea is the system can be compared with other constitutional developed countries, which embodies its superiority and can be used for reference. At the same time, due to the deficiencies in theory and operation of the constitutional appeal system in South Korea, there has been controversy in the field which has not been clearly stipulated. First, there are certain disputes in the scope of the object of review of the constitutional appeal, including the determination of the constitutional norms and the constitutional judgment of the constitutional appeal, the determination of the constitutional appeal against the court decision, and the determination of the constitutional appeal against the court. Whether the prosecution decision of the procuratorial organ is recognized, and whether the constitutional appeal of the ruling act is recognized or not; Second, whether the supplementary principle of constitutional appeal should be recognized in the form of legal express, and whether to admit the exception; third, whether to explicitly approve the decision of "false disposition" by law. The significance of this paper is to introduce the appeal system of the constitution of Korea in detail, to study its theoretical framework, function value, formal effect, and to sort out the problems existing in the actual operation, and to provide some reference significance on the basis of the study and study.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：延邊大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號(hào)】：DD911;D931.26
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 張千帆;;從憲法到憲政——司法審查制度比較研究[J];比較法研究;2008年01期
2 劉志剛;民主與法治:憲法訴訟的價(jià)值理念探幽[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年03期
3 申平;許身健;;韓國(guó)憲法裁判的基本原理[J];法律適用;2008年08期
4 楊良厚,周麗;略論我國(guó)違憲審查模式的選擇[J];河北法學(xué);2002年S1期
5 邢益精;憲政的歷程——韓國(guó)違憲審查:制度與背景之考察[J];河北法學(xué);2004年09期
6 胡錦光;;論憲法法院審查制的成因[J];金陵法律評(píng)論;2001年01期
7 陶建國(guó),奉小政;淺論韓國(guó)的憲法法院制度[J];零陵學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年12期
8 韓大元;;簡(jiǎn)論“權(quán)利救濟(jì)程序窮盡”原則的功能與界限[J];南陽(yáng)師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年05期
9 杜鋼建;韓國(guó)憲法審查制度研究[J];求索;2002年03期
10 汪鐵民;憲法訴訟問(wèn)題研究:一種關(guān)于憲法監(jiān)督司法化的思考[J];人大研究;1998年04期
相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條
1 中國(guó)社科院法學(xué)研究所 法學(xué)博士 陳欣新;[N];人民法院報(bào);2002年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 王瑞;韓國(guó)違憲審查制度研究及啟示[D];東北大學(xué);2006年
，本文編號(hào)：2387410
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/fashilw/2387410.html
最近更新
教材專著
