摘要
2016年11月,因香港立法会个别候任议员就职宣誓中带有"港独"言论,全国人大常委会主动针对《基本法》第104条进行了解释。这引发香港民众的热议和争论,其焦点是《基本法》第158条第3款中香港终审法院提请释法及其与人大主动释法的关系问题。《基本法》设计的解释体制因两地的司法传统差异,导致集中释法与分散释法之间的不对接、最终解释权与司法终审权之间的屏蔽,从而形成了主动释法与提请释法之间的不协调问题。对此,应该依据法律纠纷涉人涉事的区域范围、关联关系和重要程度,通过人大立法(解释)划定两地的释法范围;同时制定特区《基本法》解释的技术规范,指导特区法官的个案释法。
In November 2016, the Standing Committee of the National People＇s Congress （NPC） took the initiative to explain Article 104 of the Basic Law, because the ＂Hong Kong independence＂ ideawas used in the oath of office by a small number of members of the Hong Kong Legislative Council. This has sparked the heated debate and controversy among the people of Hong Kong. The focus is on the relationship between the interpretation requested by the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal as prescribed in Article 158 （3） of the Basic Law and the unsolicited interpretation by the National People＇s Con- gress （ NPC ）. Due to the differences between the judicial traditions of the two locations, the interpretation system designed in ＂Basic Law＂ has caused the mismatch between the centralized interpretation and the decentralized interpretation, and the blocking between the ultimate interpretation right and final judicial adjudication, which resuhed in the lack of coordination between unsolicited interpretation and requested interpretation. In this regard, the NPC shall define the interpretation scope for the two locations through legislation （interpretation） in accordance with the regional scope of parties and issues involved, interrelations, and degree of importance. At the same time, it is necessary to develop technical norms for the inter- pretation of the Basic Law of the Hong Kong SAR so as to guide the Judge＇s single-case interpretation in the SAR.
作者
汪进元
WANG Jin-yuan(Law School, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China)
出处
《江苏行政学院学报》
CSSCI
北大核心
2017年第2期122-128,共7页
The Journal of Jiangsu Administration Institute
基金
国家社科基金项目"创新体制转型研究"(13BFX001)的阶段性成果
关键词
主动释法
提请释法
冲突与缓解
unsolicited interpretation
requested interpretation
conflict and mitigation
