论文部分内容阅读
《未列举基本权利的认定方法》一文将未列举权利的认定方法归纳为“求诸传统的认定方法”、“‘人的尊严’概念指引下的认定方法”和“以捍卫民主为取向的认定方法”三种,这一归纳是不全面的,而且存在着混淆认定方法与判断标准的嫌疑。美国学者提出的原旨主义方法、文本主义方法、建构性的方法、推定的方法以及其他学者提出的未列举权利的认定标准和评价标准,可以视为对该文的补正。
The article entitled “Undeclared Basic Rights Determination” summarizes the unidentified rights identification methods as “the traditional methods of identification” and “the dignity of the human being” under the guidance of the concept of identification methods “and” to defend Democracy as the orientation of the “three kinds of”, this summary is not comprehensive, and there is the suspicion of the confusion of identification methods and criteria. The original method, the method of textism, the constructive method, the method of presumption and the unidentified standard of recognition and evaluation criteria proposed by other scholars proposed by American scholars can be regarded as a correction to the article.