论户籍管理对姓名权的限制

发布时间：2018-04-17 07:40

本文选题：姓名权 + 人格权　；参考：《郑州大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：姓名是与个人生活密切相关的、使用频率很高的标识,表征了个人特有的身份和权利,是重要的社会交往工具。姓名权是公民的一项人格权利,人格权是我国宪法所确立的、以人格尊严为核心的基本权利。在我国,公安部门负责户籍管理工作,姓名登记与变更是户籍管理工作的重要内容,公民需要到其户籍所在地的公安部门办理。所以,公民的姓名权能否顺利实现,与公安机关有着密切联系。随着社会经济的发展与进步,公民越来越重视姓名权,与户籍管理部门在姓名权方面的纠纷也越来越多,一是姓氏传承的不统一,二是名字选用的特异化,这种矛盾凸显了对姓名权限制的重要性。姓名权是公民的基本权利,其行使应受到一定的限制,不能随心所欲,但是对基本权利的限制应该遵守一定的原则,根据这些原则制定一些具体的规则,以防止户籍管理部门对姓名权进行过度限制。本文从“北雁云依”案及“赵C”案谈起,通过对案件中争议焦点的法律分析和探讨、姓名权一般理论阐述、分析姓名权的户籍管理制度以及对基本权利限制的原则,最后确立户籍管理部门对姓名权限制的具体规则。我国没有《姓名法》,有关姓名权的规范较为零散和简单,缺少体系化专门性的规定。在理论研究方面,我国法学理论界的着重点在一般人格权,对于姓名权等具体的人格权利,叙述不多,对姓名权与行政权的冲突涉及更少。目前就我国姓名权的立法现状来看,由全国人大常委会制定《姓名法》的条件尚不成熟,而部门规章又不宜成为司法依据,比如在赵C案中,争议焦点之一就是《姓名登记条例(初稿)》能否作为法律依据。《民法总则》第110条仅规定自然人享有姓名权,但并未对具体内容做进一步规定,甚至对《民法通则》第99条规定的决定、使用、变更姓名的权利也未提及。综合立法现状,笔者认为,在《民法分则》中,应设人格权编,并将姓名权纳入其中,将散见于《民法通则》、人大常委会关于姓名权的立法解释、《收养法》、《婚姻法》、《居民身份证法》、《户口登记条例》等法律中的有关姓名权的规定,以及公安部《姓名登记条例(初稿)》及征求意见,加以统一与完善,弥补姓名立法的空白。本文主要有五部分组成:第一部分,介绍“北雁云依”案及“赵C”案的简要案情,分别概括两个案件中的争议焦点,即“北雁云依”案中关于“公序良俗”及“其他正当理由”的内涵及理解,“赵C”案中对“数字符号”、“公共利益”的理解,然后结合民法学、行政法学等理论对争议焦点进行法律分析。第二部分,首先分别介绍了姓和名的基本概念及意义,区分“姓”与“名”的不同功能,对其限制也应区别规定。其次梳理姓名权的历史沿革,明确姓名权的概念、特征及内容,最后分析理论界对姓名权权利属性的争论,阐述各种观点产生的背景及依据,明确姓名权兼具基本权利与民事权利的双重属性。第三部分,分析户籍管理对姓名权的限制中存在的问题,首先分别介绍对姓名决定权与姓名变更权的限制,继而提出限制制度中存在的问题。第四部分,主要从理论上阐述了对姓名权限制所要遵循的一般性原则,包括法律保留原则、公共利益原则、比例原则。第五部分,在第四部分一般原则的基础上分析户籍管理机关对姓名权限制所应当遵循的具体规则,主要包括对姓名决定权以及姓名变更权的限制规则。
[Abstract]:The name is closely related to personal life, very high frequency of use of personal identification, characterization of the unique identity and rights, is an important tool for social interaction. The right of name is a personality right of citizens, the right of personality is established by the constitution of our country, the basic right to human dignity is the core in China. The public security department, responsible for the management of household registration, name registration and change is an important part of the management of household registration, the public security departments for the citizens need to their domicile. Therefore, the smooth realization of the citizen's right of name, have close contact with the public security organs. With economic development and social progress, people pay more and more attention to the right of name in the household registration management, dispute and the right of name is also more and more, is a surname inheritance is not uniform, two specific names used, this kind of contradiction highlights the importance of the right of name right of name restrictions. It is the basic right of citizens, the exercise should be restricted, can not be arbitrary, but the basic rights should comply with certain principles according to these principles make some specific rules to prevent household management right of name of excessive restrictions. This paper starts from the "North Yan cloud in" case and "Zhao C case, through the analysis of the controversial focus of the case in the legal right of name and discussion, this article explains the general theory, analysis of the right of name of the household registration system and the principle of restrictions on basic rights, specific rules of the final establishment of household management restrictions on the right of name. China has no law > < name, the name is standard simple and scattered, lack of systematic special provisions. In the aspect of theory research, with China's legal theory focuses on the general personality right, the right of name and other specific personality rights, described much of Name conflict of rights and administrative rights to less. Current legislative situation in our country the right of name, developed by the National People's Congress "name law > conditions are not ripe, and it should not become the judicial department regulations basis, such as in the case of Zhao C, the focus of the controversy is the" Name Registration Ordinance (Draft) "whether as a legal basis for the 110th. The general principles of civil law > only stipulates the natural person enjoys the right of name, but not the specific content of further provisions, even for < > ninety-ninth of the provisions of the general principles of the civil law, decided to change the name of rights is not mentioned. The comprehensive legislation present situation, the author believes that in the civil law provisions in < >. Should be part of personal right, and the right of name included, will be scattered in the" civil law ", the NPC Standing Committee's legislative interpretation right of name," adoption Law >, < < marriage law > > < the resident identity card law, Household Registration Ordinance and other rights related names in law The provisions of the Ministry of public security and "the Name Registration Ordinance (Draft)" and solicit opinions, to be unified and perfect, make up the legislative blank name. This paper is composed of five parts: the first part introduces the brief case in North Yan cloud "case and" Zhao C "case, summed up the focus of controversy in two cases the" meaning of "public order and good morals" and "other legitimate reasons" and understand the North Yan cloud in "in the case of" Zhao C "in the case of" digital sign "," public interest "understanding, and then combined with the civil law, administrative law and other theories on the legal analysis of the focus of controversy the second part, firstly introduces the basic concept and significance of the first and last name, different functional distinction between" surname "and" name ", so the restrictions should be different provisions. Secondly, carding the historical evolution of the right of name, a clear concept of the right of name, features and content, finally analysis theory of The right of name right attribute argument, elaborated the background and basis for the various views of the double attribute of the right of name has clear basic rights and civil rights. The third part, analysis of the existing household registration restrictions to the right of name in question, first introduced the decision to name and name change right limit, then put forward the restriction system the problems. The fourth part, mainly the general principles to limit the right of name should follow the theoretically described, including the principle of legal reservation, the principle of public interest, the principle of proportionality. The fifth part analyzes the rules of the household registration authorities should follow the restrictions on the right of name in the fourth part based on the general principle mainly includes the restrictive rules decision and the name change right of name.

【学位授予单位】：郑州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923

【参考文献】