摘要
当前对比例原则的公私法适用范围、比例原则与成本收益分析的关系、比例原则的逻辑结构等问题存在较大的分歧,甚至存在误解。通过追根溯源考察比例原则的思想起源与全球适用可以发现,比例原则在越来越多的制定法中得到了直接明文或间接隐含规定,法院从"必要性"、"合理限制"、"法治国"、"本质内容"等条款解释出比例原则的情形最为多见。比例原则的本质在于调整手段与目的之间的理性关系,有助于为权力与权利的行使提供合理的尺度。比例原则不仅仅是一个行政法原则,其在公法和私法中都应有更加广阔的适用空间。尽管合比例性分析存在过大的主观性与不确定性,但比例原则具有不可替代的损益权衡功能,其不应也无法被成本收益分析所取代。"二阶"说和"三阶"说的比例原则都存在逻辑缺陷,应确立同时评价目的正当性与手段正当性的"四阶"比例原则。
At present, controversies over and misunderstandings of proportionality principle exist in its scope of application in the public and private law, in its relationship with cost-benefit analysis, and in its logical structure. However, it has been more and more frequently written either explicitly or implicitly into legislation. For instance, it is most often exemplified in court interpretation of "necessity," "reasonable restrictions," "rule of law" and "essential content." It is in essence used to rationally balance between means and ends, and provide a reasonable standard for the exercise of powers and rights. It is not just a principle of administrative law, but can be widely applied to the public law and private law. Despite the great subjectivity and uncertainty in the analysis of proportionality, it fulfills an irreplaceable function in balancing the gains and losses, and cannot be replaced by cost-benefit analysis. In consideration of the defect in the logic of "second-order" and the "third-order" model, a "fourth-order" model of proportionality principle need to be established, which evaluates the justification of the means and ends at the same time.
出处
《比较法研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第5期172-187,共16页
Journal of Comparative Law
基金
国家社科基金后期资助项目“比例原则的精确化及其限度:正当理由、商谈与正义”(19FFXB049)的阶段性成果。
关键词
比例原则
权利保障
损益权衡
成本收益分析
合宪性审查
proportionality principle
protection of rights
balance of losses and gains
cost-benefit analysis
constitutional review
