論兩種不服從的保障方式：對於「證立取向」與「權利取向」的概念初探

Justified Disobedience or a Right to Disobey?

陳弘儒(Hung-Ju Chen)

《政治與社會哲學評論》 62期 (2017/09) Pp. 127-186

https://doi.org/10.6523/168451532017090062003

摘要

本文從區分「說服的脈絡」與「抵禦的脈絡」出發，輔以不服從者可能提出的理據類型，思考如何保障公民不服從。筆者指出，保障公民不服從的討論主要是在抵禦的脈絡中討論，從而可以區分出兩種保障方式：「證立取向」與「權利取向」。這兩種取向各有其蘊含的基本命題。而區分這兩種取向的基礎理論可以從拉茲（Joseph Raz）的理論中看出端倪。在這個基礎上我進一步說明了「證立取向」與「權利取向」的意義、要件與基礎命題，並進一步分析了不服從之權的可能來源與及效果。

關鍵字

公民不服從 ； 法律責任 ； 權利取向 ； 證立取向 ； 拉茲 ； 政治參與權 ； 道德確信

並列摘要

Based on the distinction between the context of persuasion and that of anti-intervention, I construct two approaches to disobedience: a justification-based and a rights-based approach. These two approaches are discussed in the context of anti-intervention in this article. Joseph Raz's theory provides the foundation for these two approaches here. After explicating his theory, I develop a conceptual framework that provides a better understanding of how to determine disobedients' legal liabilities. I also investigate core themes entailed in the two approaches, respond to critics, and explicate two possible sources of a right to disobey: the right of moral conviction and that of political participation. My sole purpose is to provide a conceptual analysis of the distinction between a justification-based and a rights-based approach to disobedience that can pave the way for further normative arguments.

並列關鍵字

civil disobedience ； legal liability ； a rights-based approach ； a justification-based approach ； Joseph Raz ； the right of political participation ； the right of moral conviction

參考文獻

Alexy, Robert,Rivers, Julian(trans.)(2010).A Theory of Constitutional Rights.Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Brownlee, Kimberley(2012).Conscience and Conviction-The Case for Civil Disobedience.Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Chen, Hung-Ju(2017).On A Right to Resistant Disobedience in a Transitional Society.Georgetown University Law Center.

Edmundson, William A.(1998).Three Anarchical Fallacies: An Essay on Political Authority.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

Freeman, Samuel(ed.)(1999).Collected Papers.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.