Study of Theory of Institutional Guarantee---A Comparative Study in West Germany and Japan

本研究的重点是考察魏玛宪法下卡尔·施密特的制度保障理论，以及波恩基本法下彼得·哈伯勒的制度基本权利理论。本文试图梳理两种理论的特点及其相互关系，并对宪法解释中存在的问题进行分析。这项研究明确了以下几点：(1)在适当的制度法律思想中，至关重要的是，应该“根据制度的内在意义，并考虑到制度在整个法律秩序中的地位”来理解法律规范。(2)在哈伯勒的制度基本权利理论中，“作为制度的基本权利”是在哈伯勒的基本权利解释中提取其制度方面而衍生出来的。这是将主观自由权利转化为客观法律的制度法学思想的正确结论。(3)在施密特的制度保障理论中，对于法律的把握本身并没有方法论的观点。但施米特要求将主观权利转化为客观法律，尽管它只存在于制度保障的一个有限方面。在这一思想中，我们可以看到他清晰地表达了他的制度法律思想的正当意图。(4)由于“制度”概念框架和“保障”范围的不确定性，不仅是制度基本权利理论，就连制度保障理论也成为了真空化理论，即基本权利变得毫无意义。它们总是有将自由转变为国家所决定的自由的危险。

The focus of this study is to examine the theory of institutional guarantee of Carl Schmitt under Weimar Constitution, as well as the institutional basic rights theory of Peter Haberle under the Bonn Basic Act. The study tried to mad characteristics of both theories and the relationship between them, and to analyze the problems of constitutional interpretation.The study made clear the following :(1) In proper institutional legal thinking it is critically important that the legal norm should be understood "in relation to the immanent meaning of institutions and with a view of the situation of institutions in the whole legal order".(2) In Haberle's theory of institutional basic rights, "basic rights as institution" are derived from all basic rights by extracting their institutional aspect in his basic rights interpretation. This is a proper conclusion of institutional legal thinking which sees subjective rights of liberty being transformed to objective law.(3) In Schmitt's institutional guarantee theory, it has no methodological point of view by itself for the grasp of law. But Schmitt demands the transfiguration of subjectiv rights to objective law, even though it is found only in a limited aspect of the institutional guarantees. In this thinking it is observed that he clearly expressed his proper intention of institutional legal thinking.(4) Thus not only the institutional basic rights but also the institutional guarantee theories became the theory of vacuumizing, i. e. making meaningless, basic rights because of the uncertainty of the frame of the notion of "institutions" and of the scope of "guarantees". They always involve a danger of changing the liberty to one which the state determines.