所有权自由与限制视域中的单双号限行常态化

发布时间：2018-07-29 20:07

【摘要】：所有权自由与所有权限制之间应求取合理的平衡,民法以所有权自由保障为基点,为协调所有权自由与限制的关系做出了相当多的规范努力。不过,北京市拟对机动车单双号限行常态化进行论证从实质上看可能会涉及抽象的立法权是否侵害所有权自由的问题,对此,民法无力也不能提供评判该行为合法性、合理性与否的判准,更甭论提供相应的救济手段了。此项作业已逾越了民法的功能限度。在现代法治社会,解决该问题惟有诉诸宪法之一途。作为规制国家公权力运作的根本大法,宪法以约束公权力及其活动成果为要务,适宜于承担对立法权进行合宪性控制进而保障法治的重任。对于单双号限行常态化立法措施是否合法与合理,可透过法律保留原则、比例原则等加以判定。考量到单双号限行常态化立法对所有人机动车使用自由限制的严重性,这一措施难以通过比例原则的检视而具有合法性。
[Abstract]:A reasonable balance should be struck between the freedom of ownership and the restriction of ownership. The civil law, based on the guarantee of freedom of ownership, has made considerable efforts to harmonize the relationship between the freedom of ownership and the restriction. However, Beijing intends to demonstrate whether the abstract legislative power may infringe upon the freedom of ownership to justify the regularization of single and even number restrictions on motor vehicles. In view of this, the civil law is powerless and unable to provide judgment on the legality of the act. The rationality or not of the judgment, let alone provide the corresponding relief means. This operation has exceeded the functional limits of civil law. In a modern society ruled by law, one way to solve this problem is to resort to the Constitution. As the fundamental law to regulate the operation of national public power, the Constitution takes the restraint of public power and its achievements as the main task, and is suitable for undertaking constitutional control over legislative power and thus ensuring the rule of law. It can be judged by the principle of legal reservation, the principle of proportion and so on, whether the legislative measures of regularization of single and even number are legal and reasonable. Considering the severity of the restriction on the freedom of use of all motor vehicles, the measure is difficult to be examined by the principle of proportionality.
【作者单位】：中国政法大学;
【基金】：中国政法大学青年教师学术创新团队项目中国政法大学优秀中青年教师培养支持计划的支持
【分类号】：D923.2

【参考文献】