「イギリス憲法の『現代化』と憲法理論」41～56頁を分担執筆した。

「平和主義―『相対化の時代』における憲法９条の課題」と題する論文を単独で執筆した。

政治学・法律学・社会学等の研究者が集った『自由への問い』と題する講座の第１巻。「同化なき社会統合」という課題との関係で宗教の役割を考察する「宗教が占めるべき社会的位置とは」と題する論文を単独で執筆した。

同書に「リベラリズム憲法学における『公共』」と題する論文を執筆した。「個人の尊重」に関する二つの理解の仕方を示したことと、フランスのイスラム・スカーフ事件をロールズの「市民的不服従」の枠組みで理解することで、憲法学における公共圏論の重要性を明らかにしたことが本論文の成果である。

The research focuses on the interface of "internationalization of constitutional law" and "constitutionalization of international law” in the sphere of human rights implementation in order to establish a new theory on human rights protection system which is more effective and efficient. The research observes positive interactions between comparative constitutional law and international human rights law at the interface, where dynamics of two phenomena ( "internationalization of constitutional law" and "constitutionalization of international law”) has a potential to build a more effective and efficient system for human rights protection. The useful features of the system are pluralistic, circulatory and non-hierarchical.

This research project contains three sub-projects. The first sub-project examines western thoughts on liberty and public after the establishment of the Westphalian sovereignty, with a special focus on thoughts after the French revolution that include literature. The second sub-project examines social thoughts on liberty and institutions on liberty in modern and contemporary Japan. In particular, the focus has been placed on the evolvement of the liberalism and comprehensivism in the prewar period, as well as the establishment of the constitutional system in the post-war period Japan. Results and findings derived have been delivered to the general public through open seminars and workshops. The third sub-project is “the history of the exchange of thoughts in East Asian”, which focuses on the tension between the Confucian sphere and modern constitutionalism. A number of international symposiums and seminars have been jointly hosted with National Taiwan University on this subject.

In 1990s, we saw the rise of legal constitutionalism, in which judges take an important role in the protection of human rights, but after September 11, we also saw the sway of legal constitutionalism. The main aim of this research is to analyze the concept of “Legalism” in the constitutional theory and legal philosophy in this historical context to find the general theory about the role of law and judges in the state of emergency.
I study especially on two issues below. One is the reconsideration of the emergency power in constitutional theory through the detailed survey of constitutional theories after September 11. The other is the reconsideration of the discussion about the protection of conscience of judges in Japanese constitutional theory. I also did research on the trend of the UK constitutional theory about legal constitutionalism and political constitutionalism to fix the historical context of the discussion on the “Legality”.

In Europe, the Human Rights Convention, European Union (EU) and national legal order constitute a “constitution” with sense of sharing a common set of values and strong institutional connection. In this “constitution”, no hierarchical structure exists since neither Convention nor EU occupies the top of the order.
Internally, the Human Rights Court seeks to exercise control over national orders in a value-neutral way, for tensions between European standards and national constitutional tradition. The principle of proportionality is thus generalized. On the other hand, strong integrity in European standards is rather emphasized toward “outside”. “Absolute” nature of freedom from torture is secured in the context of non-refoulement principle.

The study was proceeded to examine the changes of the constitutional changes in the UK under the coalition government since 2010, in the light of 'Post-Democracy' situation that meant 'degradation of democracy'. Each research member had his/her own theme to study the 'Westminster model' constitution, and the research organization totally consolidated and intensified the achievement by research meetings. We could got the results to elucidate the recent changes in the 'Westminster model' constitution.
In addition, we held two times a "Japanese-UK Constitution Seminar" in Japan, the first time, invited a constitutional professor from the Univ. of London in 2012, the other, in the King's college London in 2013. We got well achievements in research exchange, and built the foundation of further international joint research.
The research results has already summarized in the booklet, and we will publish a book next year.

The Main Question of this research is “How does the rise of constitutionalism change the constitutional theory?”. For answering this question, I choose to study the trend of UK constitutional theory after “Constitutional Reform” and found that, at least in UK, the rise of constitutionalism have changed the discourse of constitutional theory much more normative one. It is especially interesting that some scholars who belong to the “Political Constitution” School, which used to reject the normative view about constitution, began to adapt the normative view. So we could say that the rise of constitutionalism encourages the interaction and corporation between constitutional theory and political philosophy. Also I studied Japanese constitutional theory form the same point of view, and found that the theoretical shift from “Constitutional Theory as Social Science” to “Constitutional Theory as Political (Legal) Philosophy” could be also explained by the rise of constitutionalism. Based on this finding, I made little bit critical assessment about the important constitutional theories in Japan.

By the comparative study of constitutional law and the analysis of the constitutional theories in Japan and abroad, we make it clear that(1) Almost all advanced countries have some difficulties in democratic process under the historical conditions of" Post-democracy"(Colin Crouch), but(2) the problems could differ according to the political conditions, constitutional arrangements and so on. So we should have enough attention to the problems made by“Post-democracy", but also, we should not overestimate that theory.
We also show that the theory of“legal constitutionalism=liberal democracy", which is now mainstream theory in Japan and other western constitutional democracies, has difficulty in dealing with the challenge of serious gaps between the wealth and the poor, which is getting more and more serious today, both domestically and globally.
So we could tell that the reconstruction of the democratic constitutional theory is necessary today, and we should study the theory of“public sphere"not only in abstract or philosophical level, but also in the context of the constitutional arrangements and political institutions in each country. In this research, we have done some of that study.

近年、憲法学と政治哲学・社会哲学との融合・共同がさかんに行われているが、その共同の方法に関して理論的反省をする研究は必ずしも多くない。本研究では、政治哲学などの研究成果と憲法理論を架橋するための方法論的課題を明らかにし、そのうえで、憲法学の側からも、政治哲学などに対して問題提起を行うことを可能にするための基礎的研究を行う。本研究の特徴は、憲法学と政治哲学等が共通して直面する現代的諸課題まで立ち戻って、それぞれの問題関心や分析方法の差異を見極めつつ、両者の共同の可能性を追求する点にある。
平成21年度は、主に英語圏を中心にして、政治哲学などの研究と憲法理論のコラボレーションの状況を調査・分析することを課題とする研究活動を行った。具体的には、
(1)憲法学者による政治哲学などの利用の状況の調査・分析。特に1998年人権法の導入以来、政治哲学などの援用が顕著に広がったイギリス憲法理論の状況の調査・分析
(2)政治哲学などの研究者が、立憲主義や違憲審査制など、憲法学の関心対象について研究している資料・文献を収集し、憲法理論の観点から分析・検討すること。
(1)に関しては、1998年人権法の制定以降、イギリス憲法理論が政治哲学に接近していることを明らかにし、そのことがもつ意味を司法権論・憲法訴訟論との関係で考察する論文を執筆した。
(2)に関しては、憲法学者、政治学者、社会学者が共通の関心事としている「リスク社会」の問題を素材として、憲法学に固有な思考方法は何かを明らかにする一方、憲法学と政治哲学の共同のあり方について考察した。
以上の研究成果を比較的権威の高い法律雑誌等に掲載する一方、憲法理論の最先端で活躍する研究者が共著という形で公刊した書物『憲法の理論を求めて』で自説を開陳する機会を得た。

最終年度の本年度は、平成19年5月に、田村と金井が編者となり、その他の研究分担者全員も寄稿した論文集である、田村哲樹・金井篤子編『ポジティブ・アクションの可能性-男女共同参画社会の制度デザインのために』(ナカニシヤ出版、2007年)を刊行した。同書は、「理論編」と「実態編」から成り、本研究の「理論班」に属する田村と愛敬は「理論編」に、本研究の「調査班」に属する金井と田渕は「実態編」に、それぞれ寄稿している。同書の特徴として、第一に、本研究遂行者の多様な専門を反映し、ポジティブ・アクションについて多角的かつ学際的に検討している点が挙げられる。政治学(田村)、法学(愛敬)はもとより、心理学(金井)、社会学(田渕)などの専門家も参加したポジティブ・アクション研究は、日本においてあまり類例がないと思われる、第二に、本書は、理論的考察にも重点を置くことで、ポジティブ・アクション導入の際の実際的困難への対応のための指針を提供している。すなわち、ポジティブ・アクションは「逆差別」ではないのか、という問題に、同書は取り組んでいる。
また、田村は、上記共編著ののち、ジェンダーと政治についての理論的研究をさらに進め、『ポスト・リベラリズムの対抗軸』に「フェミニズムにおける『政治』像をめぐる対抗」と題する論文を執筆した。
その他に事例調査として、「あいち男女共同参画社会推進・産学官連携フォーラム」のネットワークを活用し、企業におけるポジティブ・アクションの取り組みの現状と課題について、愛知県経営者協会へのインタビュー調査などを行った。ただし、それを具体的な研究成果として結実させることはできなかった。

The aim of this research is to study economic rights in the post welfare state from the perspective of constitutional theory and legal philosophy, and reconsider the doctrine of Japanese constitutional scholars about economic rights rather critically.
According to this plan, I did some research and critical assessment on these topics below
1.libertarian theory or vindication of economic rights.
2.the theories of deliberative democracy and republicanism, which have some critical perspective on the protection of economic rights today.
3.the attempt to introduce the economic law theory into the interpretation the articles of economic rights of Japanese constitutional law. That attempt has some relationship with "neo-liberal" deregulation policy.
4.the idea and concept about economic rights in the political discourse of "Constitutional Reform".
On topic 1, I could show that constitutional lawyers in Japan have good reason to reject the libertarian concept of property. And I also found out that natural law theory of John Locke should not be understood as the justification for the libertarian property rights.
On topic 3, I studied the price regulation on the daily news paper in Japan. Some scholars say that this regulation should be abolished because of the anti-competition character, but I made it clear that news papers have important role in democratic society, so from the perspective of constitutional law, we could not say that competition is the most important value in that regulation.
Through my research, I could show that, even in the post welfare state era, economic rights could not be quasi absolute rights that libertarian hope it to be, and we need new conception of new democracy that could manage the problem of regulation and deregulation of economic freedom.

DURING THE STUDY PERIOD (3 YEARS), RESEARCH MEETING HAS BEEN HELD EACH YEAR TWO TIMES, TOTALLY SIX TIMES, WHICH RAN TWO DAYS WITH OVERNIGHT STAY. EVERY INVESTIGATOR HAS MADE A RESEARCH PRESENTATION, AND ALL PARTICIPANTS COMMENTED THEM AND DISCUSSED. AS A RESULT, WE FIND OUT FOLLOWING FOUR IMPORTANT POINTS.
(1) WE CAN SEE COMMON TENDENCY AMONG THE INVESTIGATED COUNTRIES THAT RECENTLY STATE POWERS INTERVENE IN THE CIVIL SOCIETY AND RESTRAIN CIVIL LIBERTIES GUARANTEED FOR A LONG TIME IN TERMS OF 'SECURITY' BUILDING.
(2) NEVERTHELESS EACH COUNTRY GOES ON SOMEHOW DIFFERENT WAY IN DEVELOPING LAW OF 'SECURITY' BUILDING, BECAUSE IT HAS OWN PROPER HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL BACKGROUND.
(3) FOR INSTANCE, WHILE IN USA THERE IS SO BIG CONVERSION THAT FRAME OF CONSTITUTIONALISM HAS BEEN CHANGING ESPECIALLY UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF THE 'TERROR ATTACK OF 9.11', IN UK ANTI-TERRORISM LAW HAS NOT BEEN CHANGED IN PRINCIPLE, BECAUSE IT HAD ALREADY MADE UP LAW AGAINST IRA; ALSO GERMANY, WHICH TAKES SYSTEM OF 'FIGHTING DEMOCRACY (STREITBARE DEMOKRATIE)', BALANCES FREEDOM AND SECURITY UNDER PREVIOUS LAW SYSTEM.
(4) BASED ON ABOVE GENERAL THEORY, THE RESEARCH MEETING DEALT WITH FOLLOWING THEMES: DILEMMA BETWEEN 'SECURITY' BUILDING AND CIVIL LIBERTIES, REBIRTH OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY AS A PLACE OF 'SECURITY' BUILDING, CHANGE OF CONCEPT OF SECURITY UNDER THE GLOBAL TRANSFORMATION ETC.
INVESTIGATORS HAVE WRITTEN RESEARCH ARTICLES ON THEMES STUDIED IN 3 YEARS AND PUBLISHED THEM (CF. "11. REFERENCES"). THE HEAD INVESTIGATOR WILL EDIT A RESEARCH BOOK GATHERING THESE ARTICLES INTO 5 CHAPTERS (1. GENERAL THEORY, 2. CONSTITUTIONAL THEORY ON 'SECURITY', 3. COMPARATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL STUDIES ON 'SECURITY', 4. LEGAL THEORIES ON 'SECURITY', 5. PERSPECTIVE OF CIVIC SAFETY BUILDING) AND PUBLISH IT.

本研究の課題は、福祉国家的経済政策を権利論的に批判する自由尊重主義(Libertarianism)の財産権論の問題提起を受け止めつつ、憲法学の財産権論、特に福祉国家的経済政策を人権論的に正当化する「財産権二分論」を政治思想史の観点を踏まえて、理論的に再検討することにある。この課題を遂行するため、本年度は、以下の2点を中心にして研究活動を行い、一定の研究成果を得た。
(1)近年の英米法哲学の業績を参照しながら、日本の憲法学における従来の財産権論の調査・検討を行った。その結果、財産権二分論は福祉国家的経済政策を背景にしつつ、社会主義への展望を孕みながらも主に解釈論として展開されたため、個人の人格的自律との関係で人権を基礎付ける近年の憲法理論・法哲学的な人権論に比べて人権論的基礎付けが弱いことが確認された。特に自由尊重主義の権利基底的批判を前にして財産権二分論を再構築するためには、社会主義への展望とは一応切断された形で理論的に個人の尊重に基礎付け直すことの必要性が明らかになった。
(2)自由尊重主義の財産権論及びそれを批判する政治理論・法哲学の議論の調査・検討を行った。自由尊重主義に対する有力な批判として人間の共同性を重視する共同体主義からのものがあるが、本研究は自由尊重主義と同様に個人の自律を基底的価値におくリベラリズムの前提から、理論的に自由尊重主義の問題点を明らかにした。また、日本の憲法学・法哲学が英米政治理論・法哲学におけるリベラリズムの議論枠組で議論をしているため、自由尊重主義に基づく市場主義財産権論を十分に批判できていない点を明らかにし、民主主義との関係で人権を基礎付ける可能性を展望した。
現代政治理論・法哲学の議論状況を踏まえて財産権論を再構築するための基礎理論的研究の多くを完了することができたので、今後は憲法解釈上の論点にこの研究成果を生かす作業に着手したい。