(江南大学 法学院，江苏 无锡 214122) 摘 要：通过对《体育法》文本进行分析，可以发现“体育权”不仅可能，而且确实是一项权利。尽管我国《宪法》第21条第2款明确规定“体育事业”，但经过结构、历史与功能分析可知，此条款存在被过度解读的现象。而无论是“受教育权说”“文化权说”“结社自由说”还是“新型(兴)人权说”最终都无法得出体育权是一项基本权利的结论。从体系化视角出发，体育权应是一项具有宪法性质的独立权利。从内部观察，体育权体系呈现出层次明显的“核心-基础”结构；从外部观之，体育权应是以“健康权”为基础的“二阶权利”，在法律属性上具有“发展权”的相关特征。 |
WAN Yi
(School of Law，Jiangnan University，Wuxi 214122，China) Abstract: By analyzing the text of Sports Law, the study finds that the “sports right” is not only possible, but also a right. Although the paragraph 2 in the article 21 of our Constitution stipulates “sports career”, through the analysis of structure, history and function, it can be seen that that has been over-interpreted. Whether it is the theory of “right to education”, “right to cultural”, “the freedom of association”, or “the new type of human rights”, it is impossible to conclude that the sports right is a basic right. From the perspective of systemization, sports right should be an independent right with constitutional nature. From the internal observation, the system of sports right presents the obvious “core-foundation” structure; from the external observation, sports right should be a second-order right based on the “right to health”, which has relevant characteristics of “right to development” in legal attribute. |
下载本期全文：点击下载