本文選題：住房權(quán) + 司法保障��； 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：適當(dāng)?shù)淖》渴侨祟惿婧桶l(fā)展必不可少的物質(zhì)生活條件，住有所居是人最基本和最重要的生理需求，住房權(quán)是人的基本人權(quán)�；诖耍》繖�(quán)作為一項基本人權(quán)已經(jīng)在國際范圍內(nèi)獲得了廣泛的承認(rèn)，被規(guī)定在許多重要的國際公約及各國憲法中。然而，長期以來法學(xué)界對于住房權(quán)存在錯誤的認(rèn)識，學(xué)界從理論上反對住房權(quán)的司法保障。反對者主要從兩種路徑來論證住房權(quán)的非司法保障性，，即否定住房權(quán)的人權(quán)屬性、法律權(quán)利屬性，以及根據(jù)傳統(tǒng)權(quán)利二分法片面將住房權(quán)歸為積極權(quán)利。事實上，住房權(quán)是消極性與積極性并存的一種基本人權(quán)。住房權(quán)司法保障理論上的缺乏導(dǎo)致住房權(quán)司法實踐中的困境，使人們在其住房權(quán)遭到侵犯后無法得到適當(dāng)?shù)乃痉ň葷?jì)�！盁o救濟(jì)即無權(quán)利”，司法保障是住房權(quán)從紙面上的權(quán)利順利轉(zhuǎn)變成現(xiàn)實權(quán)利的必要條件�；诖�，加強(qiáng)對公民住房權(quán)司法保障的理論研究，在批判傳統(tǒng)反對住房權(quán)司法保障理論的基礎(chǔ)上重新建構(gòu)住房權(quán)司法保障的正當(dāng)性理論具有重要的意義。具體而言，人權(quán)保護(hù)理論、權(quán)利一體化保護(hù)理論、權(quán)利救濟(jì)理論為住房權(quán)的司法保障提供了強(qiáng)大的理論支撐�！妒澜缛藱�(quán)宣言》、《經(jīng)濟(jì)、社會和文化權(quán)利國際公約》及其實施規(guī)則、一般性意見中關(guān)于住房權(quán)司法救濟(jì)的相關(guān)規(guī)定為住房權(quán)的司法保障提供了堅實的法律依據(jù)。世界各國法院特別是南非法院在住房權(quán)司法實踐中的大膽嘗試為住房權(quán)的司法保障提供了現(xiàn)實基礎(chǔ)�？傊�，住房權(quán)的司法保障在理論、法律和實踐三個層面都具有正當(dāng)性。
[Abstract]:Adequate housing is the essential material living condition for human survival and development. Living with housing is the most basic and most important physiological need of human beings, and the right to housing is the basic human rights of human beings. Based on this, the right to housing, as a basic human right, has been widely recognized in the international scope, and has been stipulated in many important international conventions and national constitutions. However, for a long time, there is a wrong understanding of housing rights in the legal circles, which oppose the judicial protection of housing rights theoretically. Opponents mainly from two ways to demonstrate the non-judicial protection of housing rights, namely, deny the human rights of housing rights, legal rights attributes, and according to the traditional dichotomy of the rights of housing rights as positive rights. In fact, the right to housing is a basic human right in which negativity and enthusiasm coexist. The lack of judicial security of housing rights leads to the dilemma in the judicial practice of housing rights, which makes people unable to obtain proper judicial remedy after their housing rights are infringed. "No remedy is no right", and judicial security is the necessary condition for the smooth transformation of housing right from the right on paper to the right of reality. Based on this, it is of great significance to strengthen the theoretical research on the judicial security of citizens' housing rights, and to re-construct the theory of the legitimacy of the judicial security of housing rights on the basis of criticizing the traditional theory against the judicial security of housing rights. Specifically, the theory of human rights protection, the theory of integrated protection of rights and the theory of right relief provide strong theoretical support for the judicial guarantee of housing rights. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and its implementing rules, The relevant provisions of the general comment on the judicial relief of housing rights provide a solid legal basis for the judicial protection of housing rights. The bold attempts made by the courts of various countries, especially the South African courts, in the judicial practice of housing rights provide a realistic basis for the judicial protection of housing rights. In a word, the judicial protection of housing right has legitimacy in theory, law and practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D922.29;D926

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張弘;;歐盟憲法公民社會權(quán)司法救濟(jì)及借鑒[J];北方法學(xué);2009年06期

2 張清;吳作君;;住房權(quán)保障如何可能研究綱要[J];北方法學(xué);2010年04期

3 龐凌,繆嵐;安全·自由·自主──住宅不受侵犯的價值蘊(yùn)含[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2005年06期

4 胡敏潔;;論社會權(quán)的可裁判性[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2006年05期

5 聶鑫;;憲法社會權(quán)及其司法救濟(jì)——比較法的視角[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2009年04期

6 莫紀(jì)宏;論人權(quán)的司法救濟(jì)[J];法商研究(中南政法學(xué)院學(xué)報);2000年05期

7 龔向和;通過司法實現(xiàn)憲法社會權(quán)——對各國憲法判例的透視[J];法商研究;2005年04期

8 龔向和;;理想與現(xiàn)實:基本權(quán)利可訴性程度研究[J];法商研究;2009年04期

9 張小羅;周剛志;;論公民住房權(quán):權(quán)利內(nèi)涵及其實現(xiàn)之道——以長沙市為個案分析對象[J];法學(xué)雜志;2009年01期

10 莫紀(jì)宏;;論人權(quán)的司法最終救濟(jì)性[J];法學(xué)家;2001年03期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前1條

1 林曉軒;[N];經(jīng)濟(jì)參考報;2007年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 黎曉武;司法救濟(jì)權(quán)研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2005年

2 王宏哲;適足住房權(quán)研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2007年

3 于宏;英美法救濟(jì)理論研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2008年

4 杜芳;我國公民住房權(quán)的司法保障研究[D];湘潭大學(xué);2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 劉宇婷;公民適足住房權(quán)及其救濟(jì)研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2011年

本文編號：2105231