《物权法》通过后,学界和媒体对物权立法过程所做的评说中包含不符合实际的和不理性的成分。《物权法》草案原本是有违宪嫌疑的,它是在经过全国人大常委会做合宪性修整之后才通过宪法之门的。在物权保护方面,最好以“有效保护”为基准对《物权法》相关条款做平衡解读。从应该善待少数人利益和意见角度看,物权立法过程有得也有失。立法过程有一些缺憾。但同时也展现了不少新的发展势头。不论是进一步做好民事立法,还是实施好《物权法》,都需要从法理上进一步理顺宪法与民法的关系。 After the adoption of the Property Law, the comments made by the academic community and the media on the legislative process of the real right include unrealistic and irrational elements. The “Property Law” was originally a bill that violated the Constitution. It was passed through the constitution only after it was constitutionally trimmed by the NPC Standing Committee. In the protection of real rights, it is best to “effective protection” as the benchmark for the “Property Law” to make a balanced interpretation of the relevant provisions. Judging from the interests and opinions of the minority people, the process of real right legislation has both advantages and disadvantages. There are some shortcomings in the legislative process. But it also shows a lot of new momentum of development. Whether it is to further improve civil legislation or to implement “Property Law”, it is necessary to further clarify the relationship between constitutional law and civil law from the perspective of jurisprudence.