本文選題：少數(shù)人 + 正義�。� 參考：《蘇州大學(xué)》2010年碩士論文

【摘要】： 自西方文藝復(fù)興和宗教革命引發(fā)反抗特權(quán)與不平等的運(yùn)動(dòng)以降,多數(shù)至上主義思想盛行于現(xiàn)代民主國(guó)家中。在此思想影響下,從民主政治的多數(shù)統(tǒng)治、社群主義和功利主義,到公司和公司法的資本多數(shù)決,再到作為權(quán)利救濟(jì)最后手段的司法裁判的多數(shù)決等,多數(shù)決作為一種可最大限度實(shí)現(xiàn)決策效率的規(guī)則廣泛適用于社會(huì)各領(lǐng)域。該規(guī)則基于兩個(gè)假定:多數(shù)人的共同智識(shí)比少數(shù)人的智識(shí)更具真理性,以及多數(shù)人利益優(yōu)先于少數(shù)人利益。而這些也隱含著多數(shù)至上主義和多數(shù)決的最大危險(xiǎn),即多數(shù)暴政,它易造成對(duì)少數(shù)人權(quán)利的無(wú)情剝奪,最后導(dǎo)致民主政治的破產(chǎn)�；谡x目的,少數(shù)人也值得尊重和保護(hù),從法律角度論證少數(shù)人具有應(yīng)然權(quán)利的總體思路是:首先闡述學(xué)理、國(guó)際法規(guī)范、憲法學(xué)意義上少數(shù)人的概念;其次,以多數(shù)至上主義為出發(fā)點(diǎn),主要從實(shí)體民主理論和程序民主理論、以德沃金和羅爾斯理論為代表的新自由主義理論、反功利主義理論分別論證少數(shù)人權(quán)利的正當(dāng)性;第三,論述立法和司法實(shí)踐中的少數(shù)人問(wèn)題,對(duì)于制定法,分別列舉并分析了國(guó)際法規(guī)范、憲法及其他部門(mén)法中的單行法關(guān)于少數(shù)人的法律規(guī)定;對(duì)于司法實(shí)踐,區(qū)分作為司法者的少數(shù)派法官和在社會(huì)生活中處于少數(shù)人地位的訴訟當(dāng)事人,總結(jié)出少數(shù)人在立法和司法上與多數(shù)人相同和相異的權(quán)利類(lèi)型;第四,在分析了理論、立法和司法實(shí)踐的基礎(chǔ)上,提出通過(guò)允許少數(shù)人的非暴力反抗,建立司法判決少數(shù)意見(jiàn)書(shū)制度,以及平等對(duì)待所有人和特別優(yōu)待處于不利地位的少數(shù)人來(lái)保障少數(shù)人應(yīng)然權(quán)利的實(shí)現(xiàn)。雖如此,但無(wú)意于顛覆民主制和多數(shù)決規(guī)則,而是提供一種反思,旨在強(qiáng)調(diào)只有在重視多數(shù)人的同時(shí)尊重和保護(hù)少數(shù)人才能真正實(shí)現(xiàn)社會(huì)的普遍正義。
[Abstract]:Since the Western Renaissance and religious revolution triggered a movement against privilege and inequality, majority supremacy has prevailed in modern democracies. Under the influence of this thought, from the majority rule of democratic politics, communitarianism and utilitarianism, to the capital majority decision of company and company law, to the majority decision of judicial decision as the last measure of right remedy, etc. Majority decision, as a rule which can maximize the efficiency of decision-making, is widely used in all fields of society. The rule is based on two assumptions: the common wisdom of the majority is more genuine than the wisdom of the minority, and the interests of the majority take precedence over the interests of the minority. These also imply the greatest danger of majority supremacy and majority decision, that is, majority tyranny, which can easily lead to the ruthless deprivation of minority rights and finally to the bankruptcy of democratic politics. For the purpose of justice, the minority is also worthy of respect and protection. The general idea of demonstrating that the minority has the right from the legal point of view is: first, to expound the academic theory, the norms of international law, and the concept of the minority in the sense of constitutional law; secondly, to demonstrate the concept of minority in the sense of constitutional law. Taking the majority supremacy as the starting point, mainly from the substantive democracy theory and the procedure democracy theory, the new liberalism theory represented by Dworkin and Rawls theory, the anti-utilitarianism theory respectively proves the minority rights legitimacy; third, This paper discusses the minority issues in legislative and judicial practice, enumerates and analyzes the legal provisions on minorities in the norms of international law, the Constitution and other departmental laws, and the judicial practice, Distinguishing the minority judges as the judiciary from the litigants who are in the minority position in the social life, and summing up the types of rights of the minorities which are the same and different from the majority in the legislation and the judicature; fourthly, in the analysis of the theory, On the basis of legislation and judicial practice, it is proposed to establish a system of minority opinions on judicial decisions by allowing non-violent resistance by minorities. And equal treatment of all and special treatment of disadvantaged minorities to protect the realization of minority rights. Nevertheless, it is not intended to subvert democracy and the rules of majority determination, but rather to provide a reflection aimed at emphasizing that universal justice in society can be truly achieved only by respecting and protecting minorities while paying attention to the majority.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D90

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張艷輝;保險(xiǎn)經(jīng)營(yíng)中的大數(shù)法則與規(guī)模經(jīng)濟(jì)性[J];財(cái)貿(mào)研究;2003年03期

2 蘇亦工;;法律術(shù)語(yǔ)中“少數(shù)人”一詞的語(yǔ)境評(píng)析[J];法學(xué);2009年04期

3 肖們;;論少數(shù)人的權(quán)利[J];華南理工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年02期

4 胡玉鴻;;“弱者”之類(lèi)型:一項(xiàng)法社會(huì)學(xué)的考察[J];江蘇行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年03期

5 張旺;民主政治中的多數(shù)統(tǒng)治與少數(shù)人的權(quán)利[J];理論學(xué)刊;2005年01期

6 何繼業(yè);羅文祿;;對(duì)抗與妥協(xié):美國(guó)聯(lián)邦最高法院判決形成機(jī)制研究[J];四川師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年03期

7 周永坤;;違憲審查的民主正當(dāng)性問(wèn)題[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2007年04期

8 鄭玉敏;;德沃金的少數(shù)人權(quán)利法理及其中國(guó)進(jìn)路[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)輯刊;2008年05期

9 周偉;各國(guó)憲法對(duì)少數(shù)民族權(quán)利的保護(hù)[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)研究;2000年02期

10 張志華;透視多數(shù)原則——由薩托利“有限多數(shù)原則”引發(fā)的思考[J];社科縱橫;2004年05期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 姜毅;少數(shù)人權(quán)利保護(hù)的憲法研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2007年

2 陳璐瓊;判決書(shū)公布少數(shù)意見(jiàn)的哈姆雷特難題[D];北京大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：1942681