作者：陈景辉
作者介绍：中国政法大学教授，博士生导师
出版日期：2017年10月9日
内容提要 诞生自德国公法的比例原则,呈现出双重的普遍性:不但逐渐被其他国家接受(地域普遍化),也开始向私法领域挺进(领域普遍化)。那么,比例原则的普遍性存在理论上的根据吗?就比例原则而言,如果它具备普遍性,要么因为它是理性化的一般要求、要么因为它是某种程序、要么因为它是某种终极价值,但这些看法都误解了比例原则的性质。因此,比例原则的普遍化,寄生于"正当限制基本权利"这个观念的普遍化。但由于"关于私法(民法)立法"与"私法(民法)调整的内容"是不同的,因此比例原则并不能够适用于私法自身的内容,所以并不具备领域的普遍化。同时,由于"正当限制基本权利"的观念本身存在问题,因此要承认基本权利的重要性,只能承认基本权利之间的冲突与紧急情况这两种限制基本权利的情形,而此时比例原则并未拥有超越其他审查工具的明显优势,所以比例原则的地域普遍性仍需要进一步的证明。
关键词 比例原则 基本权利 权利冲突 公共福祉
Abstract: It is showed that Proportionality, coming from German public law, has two universalities: the regional universality that it spreads from German to other countries, and field universality that it spreads from public law to private law. How to explain it? If the universality depends on the nature of proportionality, it means proportionality is the general requirements of rationality, or procedure, or ultimate value, those opinions, however, are misunderstood. So, the universality maybe depends on the conception of "justified limitation of fundamental rights". While, it is different between the scope of the legislation of private law and the scope of private law, and the proposition of field universality would be failed. Meanwhile, the conception of "justified limitation " undermined the importance of fundamental rights, especially when the limitation based on the public well being. Although it is recognized that the limitation is justified in the conflict and in emergency, it is still unclear that the proportionality is the best means to protect the fundamental right. To insist the regional universality, it needs a new argumentation.