論和平理論架構下的國家自衛權－以日本憲法第九條爲例

Self-Defense under the Idea of Peace-Japan's Constitution, Article 9 as an Example

陳佳慧(Chia-Hui Chen)

《思與言：人文與社會科學期刊》 46卷3期 (2008/09) Pp. 93-132

https://doi.org/10.6431/TWJHSS.200809.0093

摘要

日本憲法以和平主義爲核心思想，以憲法第九條放棄戰爭、放棄武力的行使與武力威嚇、廢除軍備以及不承認交戰權等作爲原則，以和平生存權架構出世界獨創的和平憲法。日本在標榜和平憲法、保障和平生存權的同時，卻也面對自衛權的議題，如何在國家安全保障與和平理念中之間取得折衝，如何在和平、反戰與自衛權之間求取平衡，以架構和平、安全的國家，即成爲和平研究的重要課題。 特別的是，日本憲法在第九條放棄戰爭的相關規定中，是否意味著放棄主權國家中固有的權限－自衛權，各家說法不一，有憑藉武力的自衛權說、不憑藉武力的自衛權說和否定（放棄）自衛權說等不同論據，無疑地，此隱含了自衛權、放棄戰爭與不保持戰力（廢除軍備）三者之間對和平關係的盤葛糾雜，本文嘗試解構內容與妥當性問題，並提出反思的途徑。

關鍵字

和平權 ； 自衛權 ； 日本憲法第九條

並列摘要

The principle idea of Japan's Constitution is ”peace”. In the Japan's Constitution, Article 9, which emphasize not keeping any arm force, giving up the rights to war, and focus on the peace-living had made Japan's Constitution very unique. However, how can a country protect itself, self-defense at the same time while emphasizing peace so much is a very interesting question. How to find a balance between peace, anti-war, and the rights to self-defense has become an important issue need to be addressed.
Especially, in the Japan's Constitution, Article 9, points out the idea of ”giving up the rights to war”. Is that means to give up the right to self-defense as well? Or you can still use arm force and the right to self-defense to make peace? Everybody has different ideas on this topic. The issue of conflicts between the right to self-defense, giving up the rights to war, and not keeping any arm force has become very complicated and need to be discussed. This is what I intent to do in this article. By re-discussing the meaning of peace, the right to self-defense, and find out the structure and appropriate way to address all these issues, hopefully we can find some answers.

並列關鍵字

right to peace ； right to self-defense ； the Japan's Constitution ； Article 9

參考文獻

小林正弥(2003)。非戦の哲学。日本:???新書。

小林直樹(2006)。平和憲法と共生六十年。日本:慈學舍。

小林直樹(1982)。憲法第九条。日本:岩波新書。

山內敏弘(2002)。有事法制を檢証する－「9.11以後」を平和憲法の視座から問い直す。日本:法律文化社。

山內敏弘(1979)。法律時報。日本:日本評論社。