Property Rights and the Problem of Postwar Compensation

产权与战后补偿问题

• 批准号: 12620031
• 负责人: NAKAJIMA Shigeki
• 金额: $ 1.86万
• 依托单位: Ritsumeikan University
• 依托单位国家: 日本
• 项目类别: Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
• 财政年份: 2000
• 资助国家: 日本
• 起止时间: 2000 至 2002
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-12620031/
• 关键词: property rights; postwar compensation; institutional guarantee; legislative omission; legislative measures; legislation-dependent rights; 戦後補償裁判; 憲法; 日本国憲法29条; 精度保障; 戦争損害受忍義務論; 憲法29条; ドイツ連邦補償法; 関釜従軍慰安婦訴訟; 連邦補償法; ドイツ

This Research has then pointed out that the theoretical framework of institutional guarantee plays a positive role, at least for property rights, on following five grounds: (1) property rights are not mere guaranties of value but fundamental rights which have internal and close relation to the guaranty of personal liberty; (2) property rights are inherently "legislation-dependent rights", with regulations of their contents, of ways to exercise them, to coordinate them and other rights, and so forth, put into the hands of legislators; (3) German theories on the institutional guarantee stick to the ideas, "protection of core areas", while as their structural features they exclude any orientation toward "historical and conventional things"; (4) one requires not mere protection of status quo (vested rights), but formation of property rights which have internal relation to the personal liberty designed to ensure and preserve "human dignity"; (5) property rights as such has been more and more dependent these days on the national social and economic policies over distribution of property. From the above mentioned, this Research has concluded that, when substance of property rights which have internal relation to the personal liberty of individuals are considered to be violated, the legislators have an obligation not to leave the damage alone, but to take the positive legislative measures to recover it.

本研究进而指出，制度保障的理论框架至少对财产权具有积极的作用，其理由有五：（1）财产权不是单纯的价值自由，而是与人身自由保障有着内在的、密切联系的基本权利;（2）财产权本质上是“立法依赖性权利”，其内容、行使方式、与其他权利的协调等都由立法者规定;（3）德国的制度保障理论坚持“保护核心区”的思想，但其结构特征是排斥任何“历史的、传统的东西”的取向;（4）不要求仅仅保护现状（既得权利），但财产权的形成，与旨在确保和维护“人的尊严”的个人自由有内在联系;（5）财产权本身越来越依赖于国家的社会经济政策来分配财产。由此，本研究得出结论，当与个人人身自由有内在联系的财产权的实质被认为受到侵犯时，立法者有义务不对损害置之不理，而应采取积极的立法措施予以恢复。