In modern countries,the protection of human rights is considered the cornerstone of both democracy and the rule of law.The evolution from enumerating specific rights to incorporating broader,generalized human rights provisions repre-sents an institutional advancement in the framework of human rights protection in China.From a systemic perspective,the fundamental rights of citizens represent a spe-cific embodiment of human rights,while human rights are the generalized expression of these fundamental rights.This study analyzes 574 judicial cases in which the people's courts of China applied human rights principles and reveals that most of these cases fall within civil,criminal,and administrative law and that these cases can be categorized into three distinct types:value proclamation,rhetorical discourse,and direct justification.In the value proclamation type,many people's courts have pro-claimed human rights principles or human rights guarantees as a value,but these proc-lamations do not function as evidence in the adjudication process.Instead,they serve as a form of"icing on the cake",reinforcing the judgment without influencing its core legal basis.In the rhetorical discourse type,some people's courts express human rights principles in a manner that is somewhat disconnected from the adjudication out-come.In such cases,human rights principles serve primarily a rhetorical function in the reasoning,rather than acting as substantive legal testimony.As a result,the final judgment often represents a"sudden departure"from the invoked human rights prin-ciples.In direct justification type,many people's courts have explicitly used human rights principles as a central rationale for their decisions,thereby directly influencing and supporting the adjudication outcome.In applying human rights principles,the people's courts adhere to the formulations set forth in legal documents,prioritizing these principles within the broader framework of fundamental rights.However,judi-cial practice still reveals deficiencies in the legal argumentation,which,to some degree,stems from discrepancies in the understanding of the core structure of human rights principles and the methodology in their application.The methodology in the application of human rights principles necessitates a careful consideration of their interrelationship with specific legal rules and pertinent legal principles.Whether the human rights principles are invoked in the Constitution or specific statutes,courts are required to engage in thorough reasoning,explicitly connecting these principles to con-crete legal rules rather than relying on vague generalities.When connected to pertinent legal principles,human rights principles should assume a negative role rather than a positive one,serving as vetoes and guiding influences.People's courts cannot raise new claims solely based on human rights principles;instead,they,in accordance with human rights principles,are tasked with evaluating existing claims that are made pur-suant to pertinent legal principles or rules.In cases where no specific legal rules exist,the people's courts should align their considerations with the legal principles of the relevant area,thereby deriving corresponding specific rules based on this evaluation.
human rights principlesrationalemethodology in the applica-tion
万方数据
