作者：李海平
作者介绍：上海交通大学凯原法学院教授
出版日期：2026年4月9日
内容提要 备案审查中的涉宪性判断，是对备案审查案件所涉争议是否属于宪法问题予以判定的活动。涉宪性判断应当考量系争规定的法律位阶、法域归属和宪法外上位法规定类型三个因素，按照“正向确定→反向排除”的二阶层分析框架进行。在正向确定阶层，系争规定的法律位阶是涉宪性判断的考量因素。备案审查机关需在划定系争规定的宪法外上位法总体范围的基础上，按照法律形式、法律文件、法律规定先后顺序识别具体的宪法外上位法规定；不具备宪法外上位法规定的系争规定应当被判定为涉宪，具备宪法外上位法规定的系争规定是否涉宪留待反向排除阶层判定。在反向排除阶层，系争规定的法域归属和宪法外上位法规定类型均须纳入考量范围。属于私法的系争规定应当被判定为不涉宪，须以《民法典》等为依据对其进行合法性审查；属于公法、社会法的系争规定是否涉宪，须根据其宪法外上位法规定类型加以判定。当宪法外上位法规定为具体化规定时，应当认定案涉争议属于法律问题，对系争规定进行合法性审查；当宪法外上位法规定为解释性规定时，应当认定案涉争议属于宪法问题，对系争规定进行合宪性审查。
关键词 备案审查 合宪性审查 涉宪性判断 法律位阶 法域
Abstract: The judgement of relevance to the constitution in record and review refers to the activity of judging whether the dispute involved in the record and review case belongs to constitutional issues. The judgement of relevance to the constitution should consider three factors: the legal hierarchy and legal field of the disputed provision, and the type of the higher-level law outside the constitution. It should be conducted following a two-tier analytical framework of ‘positive determination → negative exclusion’. In the positive determination tier, the legal hierarchy of the disputed provision is a factor to be considered; the record and review authority needs to identify the specific higher-level laws based on the overall scope of the higher-level laws outside the constitution of the disputed provision, in the order of legal form, legal document, and legal provision. Disputed provisions without higher-level laws outside the constitution should be determined relevant to the constitution, while whether those with higher-level laws outside the constitution are relevant to the constitution should be determined in the negative exclusion tier. In the negative exclusion tier, both the legal field of the disputed provisions and the type of the higher-level laws outside the constitution should be taken into account. Disputed provisions belonging to private law should be determined irrelevant to the constitution and their legality should be reviewed based on the Civil Code, etc. Whether a disputed provision belonging to public law or social law is relevant to the constitution should be determined based on the type of its higher-level laws outside the constitution. When the higher-level law outside the constitution belongs to the implementing provision, the dispute should be classified as a legal issue, and the legal review of the disputed provision should be conducted. When the higher-level law outside the constitution belongs to the interpretive provision, the dispute should be classified as a constitutional issue, and the constitutional review of the disputed provision should be conducted.
