论文部分内容阅读
近年来,以国家为被告的跨国人权诉讼数量可观。在处理这种案件时,国内法院不得不面对人权和国家豁免之间可能存在的冲突。对此,学术界提出了规范等级理论。该理论认为人权保护规则是强行法规则,而国家享有豁免权的原则是一般国际法规则,所以其地位低于强行法规则,从而导致国家豁免权规则在案件中不被适用。然而,规范等级理论是建立在对国家豁免的理论基础的错误假定之上的,并非是一种完善的理论。要解决以上的困境,需要将国家豁免的立法模式从“原则——例外”式转为“设定区分标准”式。
In recent years, the number of transnational human rights lawsuits using the state as the defendant has been considerable. In dealing with such cases, domestic courts have to face the possible conflict between human rights and State immunity. In this regard, academics put forward the normative level theory. The theory holds that the rules of human rights protection are the rules of jus cogens and that the principle of immunity enjoyed by the state is a general rule of international law. Therefore, the status of human rights protection is lower than that of jus cogens and the rules of state immunity are not applied in the cases. However, normative rank theory is based on the false assumption of the theoretical basis of state immunity and is not a sound theory. To solve the above predicament, we need to change the legislative mode of state immunity from “principle-excepting” to “setting the standard of distinction”.