经济宪政正义原则研究
|
摘要
传统经济法以国家干预经济为重要表现特征，它与凯恩斯经济学增加有效需求以刺激经济增长的理论密切相关，故它以经济增长为目标价值取向。但如果以宪政为角度对现有的经济法进行重新审视，就可发现其价值目标应当为正义原则，经济法的形成及运行应当符合经济宪政正义原则。
经济宪政正义原则的理论形成与自然法理论、经济宪政理论、布坎南宪政经济学以及罗尔斯正义论密切相关。自然法则的法律化即形成宪政，自然正义构成宪政正义之维。经济宪政作为宪政的子系统，是宪政在经济法领域的展开，经济宪政与正义原则密不可分，正义原则是经济宪政的根本价值追求，经济宪政是正义原则的最佳实现形式。在经济立宪阶段，布坎南的宪政经济学通过采用不确定之幕和运用经济学的决策成本比较，确立了参与性与“一致同意原则”为正义原则的先置程序标准，即程序正义。而实体正义则表现为经济宪政正义原则的具体内容，罗尔斯正义二原则可资借鉴，它们是作为基础的自由平等原则和作为补充的差别原则，其中差别原则是对机会公平平等原则的补充，它通过对机会公平平等原则所导致的阶段性不平等进行矫正，从而达至最终结果平等，所以平等是基础。这几项原则存在着优先次序性，首先是自由平等原则的绝对优先，这体现在政治生活领域里不容差别原则存在，其次是机会公平平等原则对差别原则的优先，这体现在经济生活领域里可以容忍差别原则的存在，但它居于次要地位，其目标也是为了达至最终结果平等。差别原则为经济法的国家干预与矫正提供了依据，同时也表明了国家干预与矫正的补充性地位。罗尔斯正义论还表明了自由相对平等的优先性，自由是正义的核心，平等是自由的平等，国家干预经济所应达到的平等最终是经济自由平等，这实际就是经济法所要保障的权利，因而，经济自由平等就是经济宪政正义原则的核心内容和实质标准。作为一项法律权利，经济宪政正义原则，即经济自由平等，具有静态和动态的结构形式，其静态结构表现为公民的经济权利与政府经济权力之间所形成的经济法律关系，其动态结构表现为经济法治的实现过程。
经济宪政正义原则必须化为具体的法律制度安排才能真正落到实处。正义原则的规范性为经济宪政的实现奠定了基础，它首先要求宪法必须要能够确保宪政正义；其次要使法律法规必须要符合正义原则和宪法精神。经济宪政还特别要求强化具体经济法律制度的设计。同时，正义原则（即经济自由平等）在经济宪政中的制度构建应当围权利保障来进行。不能发展的正义不是真正的正义，经济法治发展是检验正义原则发展的重要标准。“一致意见”是正义原则发展的逻辑起点；而公民的参与性是正义原则发展的根本保障，如果通过对话或者妥协，满足了其对立宪理念或立宪利益的需要，这种参与性将会形成“一致意见”；在没有满足参与性要求、或者没有形成一致意见情形下，应当保留公共理性和司法审判作为正义原则发展的补偿机制。
我国当前诸种经济社会问题的根源在于经济违宪和背离正义，而违宪本质上是对正义的偏离，因而解决这些问题要从纠正违宪着手以实现经济宪政正义原则。针对各种违宪的成因，在经济领域里应通过提高立法民主化程度、规范行政执法行为、强化司法程序、完善宪法解释制度、健全法规备案制度、建立公共讨论平台等措施纠正违宪。
通过综合布坎南的宪政经济学与罗尔斯正义论，经济宪政正义原则在立宪程序与实体内容上提出一套相对完整、具有操作性的正义标准，并使之法律制度化，从而实现正义原则的自由平等价值与经济宪政的权利保障措施对接吻合，这对于以经济宪政满足公民的参与愿望和意见表达，缓和乃至消除当前经济社会的各种矛盾，从而实现经济自由平等具有现实意义。
State intervention in the economy is the important characteristics of traditionaleconomic law, which is closely related to Keynes economics theory which requiresincreasing effective demand to stimulate economic growth, so traditional economiclaw takes economic growth as the goal of value. But if re-examine existing economiclaw from the constitutional perspective, we can find the value goal should be justiceprinciple. The formation and operation of economic law should conform to justiceprinciple of economic constitutionalism.
The theory formation of justice principle of economic constitutionalism isclosely related to the theory of natural law, the theory of economic constitutionalism,Buchanan's constitutional economics and Rawls’ theory of justice. The legalization ofnatural law forms constitutionalism, natural justice is the dimension of constitutionaljustice. Economic constitutionalism as a subsystem of constitutionalism is theexpansion of constitutionalism in the field of economic law. Economicconstitutionalism and justice principle are inseparable. Justice principle is the basicvalue of economic constitutionalism, and economic constitutionalism is the best formof justice principle. In the stage of forming constitution, by uncertain screen andeconomic comparison of decision-making cost, Buchanan’s constitutional economicsestablish the participation and the consensus principles as the precedent procedurestandard for justice principle, namely the procedural justice. But the substantivejustice is the specific content of justice principle of economic constitutionalism,Rawls’ two principles of justice can be used for reference, they are principles of thefreedom and equality principle which is the foundation and the difference principlewhich is the supplement, the difference principle is the supplement of the fairequality principle of opportunity，it will achieve equality of the final result bycorrecting periodical inequality which is the result of the fair equality principle ofopportunity,so the equality is the foundation. There are priorities among theseprinciples, the first is the absolute priority of principles of freedom and equality,which shows there is no difference principle in the field of politics, the second is thepriority of the fair equality principle of opportunity over the difference principle,which means that it can tolerate the existence of difference principle in the economicfield, but difference principle is in a subordinate position, and its goal is to reach the final result equality. The difference principle provides the basis for state interventionand correction in economic law, but also indicates that the state intervention andcorrection is the complementary. Rawls’ justice theory shows the priority of freedomover equality, freedom is the core of justice, equality is equality of freedom, theequality which is the goal of state intervention in the economy is ultimately theequality of economic freedom, and it is the right for the economic law to protect,therefore, the equality of economic freedom is core content and substantial standardof justice principle of economic constitutionalism. As a legal right, justice principleof economic constitutionalism, namely equality of economic freedom, has static anddynamic structure forms, the static structure is economic legal relation between civileconomic rights and government economic power, the dynamic structure is therealization of economic law.
Justice principle of Economic constitutionalism must be translated into concretelegal arrangements, so it can be truly implemented. The normative characteristics ofjustice principle laid the foundation for the realization of economic constitutionalism,it firstly requires the constitution ensuring the constitutional justice; secondly makelaws and regulations to be consistent with justice principle and the spirit of theconstitution. Design of economic constitutionalism also requires strengthening theeconomic legal system. At the same time, justice principle of economicconstitutionalism (i.e. economic freedom and equality) must be constructed in thebase of protection of the rights. The justice with no development is not real justice;the development of rule of economic law is an important criterion of development ofjustice principle." Consensus " is the logical starting point of the development ofjustice principle; Participation of citizens is the fundamental guarantee of thedevelopment of justice principles; If the conversation or compromise meet theconstitutional concept or constitutional interests, this participation will form a"consensus", In the absence of participation and consensus, the public reason andjustice should be kept as the compensation mechanism of development of justiceprinciple.
The cause of China's current economic and social problems is unconstitutionalityin the economy; it is also the deviation from justice, the nature of unconstitutionalityis the deviation from justice, thus solving these problems should start from correctingunconstitutionality to achieve justice principle of economic constitutionalism. Aimingat various causes of unconstitutionality, in order to correct the unconstitutionality itshould be adopted in the economic field to improve legislation democratization, standardize administrative enforcement, and strengthen judicial procedures, perfectthe system of constitutional interpretation, improve the filing system of regulations,establish public discussion platform etc.
By integrating Buchanan's constitutional economics and Rawls’ theory of justice,justice principle of economic constitutionalism puts forward a set of relativelycomplete, operational standards of justice in the constitutional procedure andsubstantive content, and makes them legalized and institutionalized, thus make thevalue of freedom and equality and the economic constitutional rights combinedperfectly. It has practical significance to satisfy citizen desire of participation andopinion expression, ease or eliminate all kinds of contradictions in the presenteconomy and society, thus to realize the economic freedom and equality through theeconomic constitutionalism.
经济宪政正义原则的理论形成与自然法理论、经济宪政理论、布坎南宪政经济学以及罗尔斯正义论密切相关。自然法则的法律化即形成宪政，自然正义构成宪政正义之维。经济宪政作为宪政的子系统，是宪政在经济法领域的展开，经济宪政与正义原则密不可分，正义原则是经济宪政的根本价值追求，经济宪政是正义原则的最佳实现形式。在经济立宪阶段，布坎南的宪政经济学通过采用不确定之幕和运用经济学的决策成本比较，确立了参与性与“一致同意原则”为正义原则的先置程序标准，即程序正义。而实体正义则表现为经济宪政正义原则的具体内容，罗尔斯正义二原则可资借鉴，它们是作为基础的自由平等原则和作为补充的差别原则，其中差别原则是对机会公平平等原则的补充，它通过对机会公平平等原则所导致的阶段性不平等进行矫正，从而达至最终结果平等，所以平等是基础。这几项原则存在着优先次序性，首先是自由平等原则的绝对优先，这体现在政治生活领域里不容差别原则存在，其次是机会公平平等原则对差别原则的优先，这体现在经济生活领域里可以容忍差别原则的存在，但它居于次要地位，其目标也是为了达至最终结果平等。差别原则为经济法的国家干预与矫正提供了依据，同时也表明了国家干预与矫正的补充性地位。罗尔斯正义论还表明了自由相对平等的优先性，自由是正义的核心，平等是自由的平等，国家干预经济所应达到的平等最终是经济自由平等，这实际就是经济法所要保障的权利，因而，经济自由平等就是经济宪政正义原则的核心内容和实质标准。作为一项法律权利，经济宪政正义原则，即经济自由平等，具有静态和动态的结构形式，其静态结构表现为公民的经济权利与政府经济权力之间所形成的经济法律关系，其动态结构表现为经济法治的实现过程。
经济宪政正义原则必须化为具体的法律制度安排才能真正落到实处。正义原则的规范性为经济宪政的实现奠定了基础，它首先要求宪法必须要能够确保宪政正义；其次要使法律法规必须要符合正义原则和宪法精神。经济宪政还特别要求强化具体经济法律制度的设计。同时，正义原则（即经济自由平等）在经济宪政中的制度构建应当围权利保障来进行。不能发展的正义不是真正的正义，经济法治发展是检验正义原则发展的重要标准。“一致意见”是正义原则发展的逻辑起点；而公民的参与性是正义原则发展的根本保障，如果通过对话或者妥协，满足了其对立宪理念或立宪利益的需要，这种参与性将会形成“一致意见”；在没有满足参与性要求、或者没有形成一致意见情形下，应当保留公共理性和司法审判作为正义原则发展的补偿机制。
我国当前诸种经济社会问题的根源在于经济违宪和背离正义，而违宪本质上是对正义的偏离，因而解决这些问题要从纠正违宪着手以实现经济宪政正义原则。针对各种违宪的成因，在经济领域里应通过提高立法民主化程度、规范行政执法行为、强化司法程序、完善宪法解释制度、健全法规备案制度、建立公共讨论平台等措施纠正违宪。
通过综合布坎南的宪政经济学与罗尔斯正义论，经济宪政正义原则在立宪程序与实体内容上提出一套相对完整、具有操作性的正义标准，并使之法律制度化，从而实现正义原则的自由平等价值与经济宪政的权利保障措施对接吻合，这对于以经济宪政满足公民的参与愿望和意见表达，缓和乃至消除当前经济社会的各种矛盾，从而实现经济自由平等具有现实意义。
State intervention in the economy is the important characteristics of traditionaleconomic law, which is closely related to Keynes economics theory which requiresincreasing effective demand to stimulate economic growth, so traditional economiclaw takes economic growth as the goal of value. But if re-examine existing economiclaw from the constitutional perspective, we can find the value goal should be justiceprinciple. The formation and operation of economic law should conform to justiceprinciple of economic constitutionalism.
The theory formation of justice principle of economic constitutionalism isclosely related to the theory of natural law, the theory of economic constitutionalism,Buchanan's constitutional economics and Rawls’ theory of justice. The legalization ofnatural law forms constitutionalism, natural justice is the dimension of constitutionaljustice. Economic constitutionalism as a subsystem of constitutionalism is theexpansion of constitutionalism in the field of economic law. Economicconstitutionalism and justice principle are inseparable. Justice principle is the basicvalue of economic constitutionalism, and economic constitutionalism is the best formof justice principle. In the stage of forming constitution, by uncertain screen andeconomic comparison of decision-making cost, Buchanan’s constitutional economicsestablish the participation and the consensus principles as the precedent procedurestandard for justice principle, namely the procedural justice. But the substantivejustice is the specific content of justice principle of economic constitutionalism,Rawls’ two principles of justice can be used for reference, they are principles of thefreedom and equality principle which is the foundation and the difference principlewhich is the supplement, the difference principle is the supplement of the fairequality principle of opportunity，it will achieve equality of the final result bycorrecting periodical inequality which is the result of the fair equality principle ofopportunity,so the equality is the foundation. There are priorities among theseprinciples, the first is the absolute priority of principles of freedom and equality,which shows there is no difference principle in the field of politics, the second is thepriority of the fair equality principle of opportunity over the difference principle,which means that it can tolerate the existence of difference principle in the economicfield, but difference principle is in a subordinate position, and its goal is to reach the final result equality. The difference principle provides the basis for state interventionand correction in economic law, but also indicates that the state intervention andcorrection is the complementary. Rawls’ justice theory shows the priority of freedomover equality, freedom is the core of justice, equality is equality of freedom, theequality which is the goal of state intervention in the economy is ultimately theequality of economic freedom, and it is the right for the economic law to protect,therefore, the equality of economic freedom is core content and substantial standardof justice principle of economic constitutionalism. As a legal right, justice principleof economic constitutionalism, namely equality of economic freedom, has static anddynamic structure forms, the static structure is economic legal relation between civileconomic rights and government economic power, the dynamic structure is therealization of economic law.
Justice principle of Economic constitutionalism must be translated into concretelegal arrangements, so it can be truly implemented. The normative characteristics ofjustice principle laid the foundation for the realization of economic constitutionalism,it firstly requires the constitution ensuring the constitutional justice; secondly makelaws and regulations to be consistent with justice principle and the spirit of theconstitution. Design of economic constitutionalism also requires strengthening theeconomic legal system. At the same time, justice principle of economicconstitutionalism (i.e. economic freedom and equality) must be constructed in thebase of protection of the rights. The justice with no development is not real justice;the development of rule of economic law is an important criterion of development ofjustice principle." Consensus " is the logical starting point of the development ofjustice principle; Participation of citizens is the fundamental guarantee of thedevelopment of justice principles; If the conversation or compromise meet theconstitutional concept or constitutional interests, this participation will form a"consensus", In the absence of participation and consensus, the public reason andjustice should be kept as the compensation mechanism of development of justiceprinciple.
The cause of China's current economic and social problems is unconstitutionalityin the economy; it is also the deviation from justice, the nature of unconstitutionalityis the deviation from justice, thus solving these problems should start from correctingunconstitutionality to achieve justice principle of economic constitutionalism. Aimingat various causes of unconstitutionality, in order to correct the unconstitutionality itshould be adopted in the economic field to improve legislation democratization, standardize administrative enforcement, and strengthen judicial procedures, perfectthe system of constitutional interpretation, improve the filing system of regulations,establish public discussion platform etc.
By integrating Buchanan's constitutional economics and Rawls’ theory of justice,justice principle of economic constitutionalism puts forward a set of relativelycomplete, operational standards of justice in the constitutional procedure andsubstantive content, and makes them legalized and institutionalized, thus make thevalue of freedom and equality and the economic constitutional rights combinedperfectly. It has practical significance to satisfy citizen desire of participation andopinion expression, ease or eliminate all kinds of contradictions in the presenteconomy and society, thus to realize the economic freedom and equality through theeconomic constitutionalism.
引文
[1][澳]布伦南,[美]布坎南.宪政经济学.冯克利等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2004,5,344
[2]单飞跃.经济宪政:一个宪政新命题的提出.湖湘论坛,2005,(3):49-51
[3]肖峰昌,阎桂芳.经济法的宪政价值研究,山西大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,29(4):81-85
[4]李慧芳.布坎南宪政经济思想初探.大学时代,2006,(4):35-36
[5]王显勇.论经济法的宪法基础.湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2006,20(3):137-144
[6][美]理查德·A·波斯纳.法律的经济分析（上）.蒋兆康译.北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1997,1,31
[7] Posner, R. A. Utilitarianism, Economics and Legal Theory. Journal of LegalStudies,1979,8:103-140
[8][美]查尔斯·A·比尔德.美国宪法的经济观.何希齐译.北京:商务印书馆,1984,2
[9][美]詹姆斯·M.布坎南,戈登·塔洛克.同意的计算——立宪民主的逻辑基础.陈光金译.北京：中国社会科学出版社,2000,2,1-7
[10]约翰·罗尔斯.正义论.何怀宏,何包钢,廖申白译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1988,3,56,57,200,249,73,54
[11]毛勒堂.试论经济正义及其存在论基础.云南大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(1):36-41
[12]何建华.经济正义论.上海：上海人民出版社,2000,174-180
[13]王爽.论经济正义:[新疆大学硕士学位论文].乌鲁木齐：新疆大学，2006，4
[14] Robert B. Cooter Jr., Thomas Ulen.Law and Economics. London: Prentice Hall,2002,5
[15] H. L. Feldman. the Critical Discussion. Objectivity of Legal Judgment,1994,92:1187
[16] Ugo Mattei. Basic Principles of Property Law: A Comparative Legal andEconomic Introduction. Seattle: Praeger Publishers Inc.,2000,5
[17][美]乌戈·马太.比较法律经济学.沈宗灵译,张建伟审校.北京：北京大学出版社,2005,2
[18]张维迎.“作为激励机制的法律”,信息、信任与法律.上海：三联书店,2003,63-178
[19] Frank Thilly. A History of Philosophy. Boston: Ulan Press,1995,187
[20]刘连泰.宪法的彼岸世界与此岸世界.浙江社会科学,2004,(6):58-66
[21]李琦.宪法哲学:追问宪法的正当性.厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005,169(3):13-20
[22] Henry Sumner Maine. Ancient Law. New York: Cosimo Classics,2005,43
[23]汪太贤.从神谕到自然的启示:古希腊自然法的源起与生成.现代法学,2004,26(6):16-25
[24] Ernest Barker.The Political Thought Of Plato And Aristotle. Boston: Ulan Press,1998,72
[25][德]海因里希·罗门.自然法的观念史和哲学.姚中秋译.上海:三联书店出版社,2007,11-12
[26][德]文德尔班.哲学史教程(上卷).罗达仁译.北京:商务印书馆,1987,105
[27]朱海波,柯卫.论西方现代宪政主义的哲学基础——自然法.山东社会科学,2008,(8):37-41
[28] Derek Heater. Citizenship: The Civic Ideal in World History, Polities andEducation. Manchester: Manchester University Press,2004,12
[29][古罗马]马可·奥勒留.沉思录.何怀宏译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1989,51
[30]丛日云.西方政治文化传统.长春:吉林出版集团有限责任公司,2007,202
[31] Edward S. Corwin. The "Higher Law" Background of American ConstitutionalLaw. New York: Liberty Fund Inc,1996,7
[32][意]托马斯·阿奎那.阿奎那政治著作选.马槐清译.北京:商务印书馆,1963,107
[33] Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologiae: Volume1, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,2006,53
[34]北京大学西语系资料组.从文艺复兴到十九世纪资产阶级文学家艺术家有关人道主义人性言论选辑.北京:商务印书馆,1971,3
[35]应克复.西方民主史.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1997,126
[36]石柏林,刘焕桂.权力文化观与现代法治.徐州师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,33(1):110-116
[37]苏力.从契约理论到社会契约理论—一种国家学说的知识考古学.中国社会科学,1996,(3):79-103
[38] John Locke. Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress,1988,77
[39][德]恩斯特·卡西尔.国家的神话.范进,杨君游,柯锦华译.北京:华夏出版社,1999,205
[40] L.Strauss. Natural Right and History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1953,215
[41]封丽霞.法典法、判例法抑或“混合法”:一个认识论的立场.环球法律评论,2003,(3):322-328
[42]申建林.自然法理论的演进——西方主流人权观探源.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2005,125
[43] Simpson, A History of The Common Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press,1987,203
[44] Robert Alexy, The theory of Constitutional Right. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress,2002,21
[45]吕世伦,张学超.西方自然法的几个基本问题.法学研究,2004,(1):150-160
[46][古希腊]亚里士多德.政治学.吴寿彭译.北京:商务印书馆,1965,148,138,167-168
[47][古希腊]柏拉图.理想国.郭斌和,张竹明译.北京:商务印书馆,1986,61,19
[48][古罗马]西塞罗.论共和国论法律.王焕生译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997,83
[49]周芳勤,王珉.自然法学说中“正义”观念的历史变迁.广西政法管理干部学院学报,2003,(4):40-42
[50][英]梅因.古代法.沈景一译.北京:商务印书馆,1996,51
[51]郭道晖.法的时代精神.长沙：湖南人民出版社,1997,377
[52]单飞跃,唐翔宇.经济宪政:宪政与经济关系新解读.求索,2006,(6):124-125
[53] James M. Buchanan. The Domine of constitutional Economics. ConstitutionalPolitical Economy,1990,(1):98-109
[54] James M. Buchanan. Limits of Liberty, Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1975,162
[55]方福前.公共选择理论——政治的经济学.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2000,229
[56] James M. Buchanan. Explorations into Constitutional Economics, Texas: A&MUniversity Press,1989,58
[57]唐寿宁.“同意的计算序言——公共选择理论:应用还是拓展”,[美]布坎南、塔洛克.同意的计算.陈光金译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2000,5
[58]冯兴元.宪政经济学编校序.参见[澳]布伦南,[美]布坎南.宪政经济学,冯克利等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2004,5
[59][美]杰夫雷·萨克斯,胡永泰,[美]杨小凯.经济改革与宪政转型.开放时代,2000,(4):15
[60] Michael Mastanduno. Toward a Realist Theory of State Action. InternationalStudies Quarterly,1989,133(4):121-125
[61][法]卢梭.社会契约论.何兆武译.北京：商务印书馆,2009,25-26
[62][法]孟德斯鸠.论法的精神（上）.张雁深译.北京：商务印书馆,1986,151,154
[63]车亮亮.经济法的初始范畴研究——权利视角的思考与探讨.[西南政法大学硕士学位论文].重庆：西南政法大学，2008，11-18
[64]高全喜.宪政正义与超验正义——两种正义及其悖论. http://www.comment-cn.net/politics/politicalidea/2006/0601/article_1837.html,访问日期2012-9-17
[65] John Rawls. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,2005,56,57
[66] John Rawls. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press,1993,208
[67] A. Wertheimer. The Equalization of Legal Resources. Philosophy and PublicAffairs,1988,17:301-322
[68]何怀宏.公平的正义:解读罗尔斯《正义论》.济南:山东人民出版社,2002,144-145,48
[69] Jason Brennan. Rawls’ Paradox. Constit Polit Econ,2007,18:287-299
[70] John Rawls. Two concepts of rules. The Philosophical Review,1955,64:3-32
[71] Burleigh Wilkins. Rawls on Human Rights: a Review Essay. The Journal ofEthics,2008,12:105-122
[72] Milton Fisk. the Sate and the Market in Rawls. Studies in Soviet Thought,1985,30:347-364
[73] Erin M. Cline. Two Senses of Justice: Confucianism, Rawls and ComparativePolitical Philosophy. The Journal of Ethics,2008,12:123-140
[74][美]博登海默.法理学:法律哲学与法律方法.邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004,298,307,347
[75]付子堂.法理学进阶.北京:法律出版社,2005,131,116,171,172
[76] Thomas Nagel. The Problem of Global Justice. hilosophy and Public Afairs,2005,35:125-139
[77]马克思恩格斯全集(第1卷).北京:人民出版社,1995,201
[78][英]洛克.政府论(下篇).叶启芳,瞿菊农译.北京:商务印书馆,1983,36
[79]杨正旭.美国宪法上的言论自由并非绝对的权利——以联邦法院判例举证.中正日报,1986-5-26
[80][英]密尔.论自由.许宝骙译.北京:商务印书馆,2007,66
[81]张子礼,邓晓臻.从权利到价值：马克思对现代社会理念的批判与重建.东岳论丛，2010,(6):164
[82] Dan Usher. Rawls, Rules and Objectives: A Critique of the Two Principles ofJustice. Constitutional Political Economy,1996,7:103-126
[83] John Stuart Mill. On Liberty. New York: Dover Publications,2002,190
[84] John Rawls. Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical. Philosophy andPublic Affairs,1986,15:223-251
[85] Harry Brighouse. Political Equality in Justice as Fairness. Philosophical Studies,1997,86:155-184
[86] Richard J. Arneson. Against Rawlsian Equality of Opportunity. PhilosophicalStudies,1999,93:77-112
[87] Bengt–Arne Wickstrom. Economic justice and economic power: An inquiryinto distributive justice and political stability. Public Choice,1984,43:225-249
[88] Cohen G.A. The Pareto Argument for Inequality. Social Philosophy and Policy,1995,12:160-185
[89] Smilansky Saul. Egalitarian Justice and the Importance of the Free WillProblem. Philosophia,1997,25:153-161
[90]朱巧玲,卢现祥.新制度经济学国家理论的构建:核心问题与框架.经济评论,2006,(5):88
[91]冯克利.宪政经济学(译序).[澳]布伦南,[美]布坎南.宪政经济学.冯克利等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2004,7
[92][德]柯武刚,史漫飞.制度经济学——经济秩序与公共政策.韩朝华译.北京:商务印书馆,2000,252
[93] Helen. The Economic Borders of the State, Oxford: Oxford University Press,1989,142
[94][美]道格拉斯·诺斯.经济史中的结构与变迁.陈郁,罗华平译.上海:上海三联书店,1991,20
[95]马克思恩格斯选集(第四卷).北京:人民出版社,1972,137
[96]李昌麒.经济法——国家干预经济的基本法律形式.成都:四川人民出版社,1995,27
[97]漆多俊.论权力,法学研究,200l,(1):30
[98] Dicey, A. V. Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution.Indianapolis: Liberty Fund,1982,120
[99] Chen, Albert H. Y. Toward a Legal Enlightenment: Discussions inContemporary China on the Rule of Law. UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal,1999-2000,17:125-165
[100] Sartori, Giovanni. The Theory of Democracy Revisited Chatham, New Jersey:Chatham House,1987,308
[101]陈旭东.宪政经济学与中国经济改革的宪政问题,现代财经,2007,(2):7
[102]张金来.公平正义的法治实现.陕西职业技术学院学报,2007,(9):32
[103][英]J.M.凯利.西方法律思想简史.王笑红译.北京：法律出版社,2002,6-7
[104]付子堂.法理学进阶(第二版).北京：法律出版社,2006,170
[105] Roscoe Pound. Jurisprudence(Vols.1). New York：The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd.,2000,367-368
[106]鲍家志,盘佳.司法正义是实现社会正义的保证.广西社会主义学院学报,2010,(8):85,86
[107]邓仁伟.发展伦理视阈中的正义原则.[江西师范大学硕士研究生学位论文].南昌：江西师范大学,2008，31
[108]刘舒适.宪政传统中的罗尔斯正义理论之演变—从正义论到政治自由主义:
[湖南师范大学硕士学位论文],长沙：湖南师范大学，2003，12,13
[109]史华松.转型时期中国经济法的宪政价值探究.西南政法大学学报,2009,(4):10
[110]刘舒适.罗尔斯正义理论的宪政之维——从正义论到政治自由主义.新疆社会科学,2005,(6):15
[111]周叶中.宪法(第二版).高等教育出版社.北京：北京大学出版社,2005,183,390-391,180
[112]韩磊.正义原则与中国社会正义制度构建.黑河学刊,2009，(10):14
[113][法]托克维尔.论美国的民主(下卷).董果良译.北京：商务印书馆,2004,640
[114]戴剑波.权利正义论.北京：法律出版社,2007,137,136,148,57,119
[115]马晓燕.论当代中国社会转型期的正义问题.思想战线,2011,(4):73-75
[116]魏琼.西方经济法发达史.北京：北京大学出版社,2006,261,262,112,62
[117]王红霞,李国海.“竞争权”驳论——兼论竞争法的利益保护观.法学评论,2012,(4):99
[118]周灵方.竞争正义如何可能——反垄断法的经济伦理学批判.求索,2012，(3):118
[119]王新红.规则约束下的相机抉择——宏观调控法几个基本问题的再思考.法学论坛,2010,(9):53
[120]严颂,何跃春.经济宪政的社会和谐功能考量.重庆科技学院学报(社会科学版),2006,(6):2-4
[121][美]詹姆斯.M.布坎南.宪法秩序的经济学与伦理学.朱泱等译.北京：商务印书馆,2008,74,77,85,89
[122]唐寿宁.经济学的宪政视角——《经济学与宪政秩序的伦理学》述评.管理世界,2005,(8):167
[123]刘典金.论罗尔斯的政治正义思想及其对中国宪政建设的启示.延安大学学报(社会科学版),2009,(2):53
[124] Viktor Vanberg, James M. Buchanan. Interests and Theories in ConstitutionalChoice, Journal of Theoretical Politics,1989,1(1):49-62
[125]王世杰,钱端升.比较宪法.北京：中国政法大学出版社,2004,313
[126]蔡定剑.关于什么是宪法.中外法学,2002,(1):92-102
[127]胡锦光,秦奥蕾.宪法实践中的违宪形态研究.河北学刊,2006,(5):166-171
[128]蔡定剑,李霞.公民申请违宪审查案例分析研讨会纪要.人大与议会网http://www.e-cpcs.org/newsinfo.asp?NewSid=8296.访问日期2010-12-30
[129]郝铁川.论良性违宪.法学研究,1996,(4):83-89
[130]童之伟.良性违宪不宜肯定:郝铁川同志有关主张的不同看法.法学研究,1996,(6):102-110
[131]童之伟.宪法实施灵活性的底线——再与郝铁川商榷.法学,1997,(5):38-43
[132]王保成.宪法权威的生成机制辨析.现代法学,2004,(6):99-104
[133]杨福忠.论我国公共信任期待下的立法听证制度.武汉理工大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(4):524-528
[134][英]丹宁.法律的正当程序——丹宁勋爵和他的法学思想.刘庸安等译.北京：法律出版社,1999,9
[135]曾兆晖.公平正义的内涵、价值选择及实现困境,安庆师范学院学报(社会科学版,2011,(7):36
[136]秦前红,涂四益.“物权法之争”与宪法解释——兼与童之伟教授商榷.法学评论,2007,(3):3-8
[137]马岭.宪法修改与宪法解释.中国青年政治学院学报,2007,(2):74-77
[138]朱群芳.完善宪法解释促进法治进程.求实,2003,(10):48-50
[139]张千帆.宪法学导论——原理与应用.北京:法律出版社,2008,122
[140]韩大元.社会转型与宪法解释功能——谈建立“中国宪法解释学"的可能性.法制与社会发展,2002,(6):6-8
[141]曾瑜.论树立宪法权威.四川师范大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(2):15-19
[142]陈旭东.宪政经济学与中国经济改革的宪政问题.现代财经,2007,(2):7-10
[143]赵迅,刘焕桂.弱势群体保护的人本主义诠释.湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2009,(1):119
[144]胡鞍钢.时事观察:弱势群体如何走进“春天里”.新华网http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2010-11/25/c_12813554.htm.访问日期2012-10-21.
[2]单飞跃.经济宪政:一个宪政新命题的提出.湖湘论坛,2005,(3):49-51
[3]肖峰昌,阎桂芳.经济法的宪政价值研究,山西大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,29(4):81-85
[4]李慧芳.布坎南宪政经济思想初探.大学时代,2006,(4):35-36
[5]王显勇.论经济法的宪法基础.湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2006,20(3):137-144
[6][美]理查德·A·波斯纳.法律的经济分析（上）.蒋兆康译.北京：中国大百科全书出版社,1997,1,31
[7] Posner, R. A. Utilitarianism, Economics and Legal Theory. Journal of LegalStudies,1979,8:103-140
[8][美]查尔斯·A·比尔德.美国宪法的经济观.何希齐译.北京:商务印书馆,1984,2
[9][美]詹姆斯·M.布坎南,戈登·塔洛克.同意的计算——立宪民主的逻辑基础.陈光金译.北京：中国社会科学出版社,2000,2,1-7
[10]约翰·罗尔斯.正义论.何怀宏,何包钢,廖申白译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1988,3,56,57,200,249,73,54
[11]毛勒堂.试论经济正义及其存在论基础.云南大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(1):36-41
[12]何建华.经济正义论.上海：上海人民出版社,2000,174-180
[13]王爽.论经济正义:[新疆大学硕士学位论文].乌鲁木齐：新疆大学，2006，4
[14] Robert B. Cooter Jr., Thomas Ulen.Law and Economics. London: Prentice Hall,2002,5
[15] H. L. Feldman. the Critical Discussion. Objectivity of Legal Judgment,1994,92:1187
[16] Ugo Mattei. Basic Principles of Property Law: A Comparative Legal andEconomic Introduction. Seattle: Praeger Publishers Inc.,2000,5
[17][美]乌戈·马太.比较法律经济学.沈宗灵译,张建伟审校.北京：北京大学出版社,2005,2
[18]张维迎.“作为激励机制的法律”,信息、信任与法律.上海：三联书店,2003,63-178
[19] Frank Thilly. A History of Philosophy. Boston: Ulan Press,1995,187
[20]刘连泰.宪法的彼岸世界与此岸世界.浙江社会科学,2004,(6):58-66
[21]李琦.宪法哲学:追问宪法的正当性.厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005,169(3):13-20
[22] Henry Sumner Maine. Ancient Law. New York: Cosimo Classics,2005,43
[23]汪太贤.从神谕到自然的启示:古希腊自然法的源起与生成.现代法学,2004,26(6):16-25
[24] Ernest Barker.The Political Thought Of Plato And Aristotle. Boston: Ulan Press,1998,72
[25][德]海因里希·罗门.自然法的观念史和哲学.姚中秋译.上海:三联书店出版社,2007,11-12
[26][德]文德尔班.哲学史教程(上卷).罗达仁译.北京:商务印书馆,1987,105
[27]朱海波,柯卫.论西方现代宪政主义的哲学基础——自然法.山东社会科学,2008,(8):37-41
[28] Derek Heater. Citizenship: The Civic Ideal in World History, Polities andEducation. Manchester: Manchester University Press,2004,12
[29][古罗马]马可·奥勒留.沉思录.何怀宏译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1989,51
[30]丛日云.西方政治文化传统.长春:吉林出版集团有限责任公司,2007,202
[31] Edward S. Corwin. The "Higher Law" Background of American ConstitutionalLaw. New York: Liberty Fund Inc,1996,7
[32][意]托马斯·阿奎那.阿奎那政治著作选.马槐清译.北京:商务印书馆,1963,107
[33] Thomas Aquinas. Summa Theologiae: Volume1, Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press,2006,53
[34]北京大学西语系资料组.从文艺复兴到十九世纪资产阶级文学家艺术家有关人道主义人性言论选辑.北京:商务印书馆,1971,3
[35]应克复.西方民主史.北京:中国社会科学出版社,1997,126
[36]石柏林,刘焕桂.权力文化观与现代法治.徐州师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2007,33(1):110-116
[37]苏力.从契约理论到社会契约理论—一种国家学说的知识考古学.中国社会科学,1996,(3):79-103
[38] John Locke. Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge:Cambridge UniversityPress,1988,77
[39][德]恩斯特·卡西尔.国家的神话.范进,杨君游,柯锦华译.北京:华夏出版社,1999,205
[40] L.Strauss. Natural Right and History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1953,215
[41]封丽霞.法典法、判例法抑或“混合法”:一个认识论的立场.环球法律评论,2003,(3):322-328
[42]申建林.自然法理论的演进——西方主流人权观探源.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2005,125
[43] Simpson, A History of The Common Law, Oxford: Clarendon Press,1987,203
[44] Robert Alexy, The theory of Constitutional Right. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress,2002,21
[45]吕世伦,张学超.西方自然法的几个基本问题.法学研究,2004,(1):150-160
[46][古希腊]亚里士多德.政治学.吴寿彭译.北京:商务印书馆,1965,148,138,167-168
[47][古希腊]柏拉图.理想国.郭斌和,张竹明译.北京:商务印书馆,1986,61,19
[48][古罗马]西塞罗.论共和国论法律.王焕生译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1997,83
[49]周芳勤,王珉.自然法学说中“正义”观念的历史变迁.广西政法管理干部学院学报,2003,(4):40-42
[50][英]梅因.古代法.沈景一译.北京:商务印书馆,1996,51
[51]郭道晖.法的时代精神.长沙：湖南人民出版社,1997,377
[52]单飞跃,唐翔宇.经济宪政:宪政与经济关系新解读.求索,2006,(6):124-125
[53] James M. Buchanan. The Domine of constitutional Economics. ConstitutionalPolitical Economy,1990,(1):98-109
[54] James M. Buchanan. Limits of Liberty, Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1975,162
[55]方福前.公共选择理论——政治的经济学.北京:中国人民大学出版社,2000,229
[56] James M. Buchanan. Explorations into Constitutional Economics, Texas: A&MUniversity Press,1989,58
[57]唐寿宁.“同意的计算序言——公共选择理论:应用还是拓展”,[美]布坎南、塔洛克.同意的计算.陈光金译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2000,5
[58]冯兴元.宪政经济学编校序.参见[澳]布伦南,[美]布坎南.宪政经济学,冯克利等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2004,5
[59][美]杰夫雷·萨克斯,胡永泰,[美]杨小凯.经济改革与宪政转型.开放时代,2000,(4):15
[60] Michael Mastanduno. Toward a Realist Theory of State Action. InternationalStudies Quarterly,1989,133(4):121-125
[61][法]卢梭.社会契约论.何兆武译.北京：商务印书馆,2009,25-26
[62][法]孟德斯鸠.论法的精神（上）.张雁深译.北京：商务印书馆,1986,151,154
[63]车亮亮.经济法的初始范畴研究——权利视角的思考与探讨.[西南政法大学硕士学位论文].重庆：西南政法大学，2008，11-18
[64]高全喜.宪政正义与超验正义——两种正义及其悖论. http://www.comment-cn.net/politics/politicalidea/2006/0601/article_1837.html,访问日期2012-9-17
[65] John Rawls. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,2005,56,57
[66] John Rawls. Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press,1993,208
[67] A. Wertheimer. The Equalization of Legal Resources. Philosophy and PublicAffairs,1988,17:301-322
[68]何怀宏.公平的正义:解读罗尔斯《正义论》.济南:山东人民出版社,2002,144-145,48
[69] Jason Brennan. Rawls’ Paradox. Constit Polit Econ,2007,18:287-299
[70] John Rawls. Two concepts of rules. The Philosophical Review,1955,64:3-32
[71] Burleigh Wilkins. Rawls on Human Rights: a Review Essay. The Journal ofEthics,2008,12:105-122
[72] Milton Fisk. the Sate and the Market in Rawls. Studies in Soviet Thought,1985,30:347-364
[73] Erin M. Cline. Two Senses of Justice: Confucianism, Rawls and ComparativePolitical Philosophy. The Journal of Ethics,2008,12:123-140
[74][美]博登海默.法理学:法律哲学与法律方法.邓正来译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004,298,307,347
[75]付子堂.法理学进阶.北京:法律出版社,2005,131,116,171,172
[76] Thomas Nagel. The Problem of Global Justice. hilosophy and Public Afairs,2005,35:125-139
[77]马克思恩格斯全集(第1卷).北京:人民出版社,1995,201
[78][英]洛克.政府论(下篇).叶启芳,瞿菊农译.北京:商务印书馆,1983,36
[79]杨正旭.美国宪法上的言论自由并非绝对的权利——以联邦法院判例举证.中正日报,1986-5-26
[80][英]密尔.论自由.许宝骙译.北京:商务印书馆,2007,66
[81]张子礼,邓晓臻.从权利到价值：马克思对现代社会理念的批判与重建.东岳论丛，2010,(6):164
[82] Dan Usher. Rawls, Rules and Objectives: A Critique of the Two Principles ofJustice. Constitutional Political Economy,1996,7:103-126
[83] John Stuart Mill. On Liberty. New York: Dover Publications,2002,190
[84] John Rawls. Justice as Fairness: Political not Metaphysical. Philosophy andPublic Affairs,1986,15:223-251
[85] Harry Brighouse. Political Equality in Justice as Fairness. Philosophical Studies,1997,86:155-184
[86] Richard J. Arneson. Against Rawlsian Equality of Opportunity. PhilosophicalStudies,1999,93:77-112
[87] Bengt–Arne Wickstrom. Economic justice and economic power: An inquiryinto distributive justice and political stability. Public Choice,1984,43:225-249
[88] Cohen G.A. The Pareto Argument for Inequality. Social Philosophy and Policy,1995,12:160-185
[89] Smilansky Saul. Egalitarian Justice and the Importance of the Free WillProblem. Philosophia,1997,25:153-161
[90]朱巧玲,卢现祥.新制度经济学国家理论的构建:核心问题与框架.经济评论,2006,(5):88
[91]冯克利.宪政经济学(译序).[澳]布伦南,[美]布坎南.宪政经济学.冯克利等译.北京:中国社会科学出版社,2004,7
[92][德]柯武刚,史漫飞.制度经济学——经济秩序与公共政策.韩朝华译.北京:商务印书馆,2000,252
[93] Helen. The Economic Borders of the State, Oxford: Oxford University Press,1989,142
[94][美]道格拉斯·诺斯.经济史中的结构与变迁.陈郁,罗华平译.上海:上海三联书店,1991,20
[95]马克思恩格斯选集(第四卷).北京:人民出版社,1972,137
[96]李昌麒.经济法——国家干预经济的基本法律形式.成都:四川人民出版社,1995,27
[97]漆多俊.论权力,法学研究,200l,(1):30
[98] Dicey, A. V. Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution.Indianapolis: Liberty Fund,1982,120
[99] Chen, Albert H. Y. Toward a Legal Enlightenment: Discussions inContemporary China on the Rule of Law. UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal,1999-2000,17:125-165
[100] Sartori, Giovanni. The Theory of Democracy Revisited Chatham, New Jersey:Chatham House,1987,308
[101]陈旭东.宪政经济学与中国经济改革的宪政问题,现代财经,2007,(2):7
[102]张金来.公平正义的法治实现.陕西职业技术学院学报,2007,(9):32
[103][英]J.M.凯利.西方法律思想简史.王笑红译.北京：法律出版社,2002,6-7
[104]付子堂.法理学进阶(第二版).北京：法律出版社,2006,170
[105] Roscoe Pound. Jurisprudence(Vols.1). New York：The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd.,2000,367-368
[106]鲍家志,盘佳.司法正义是实现社会正义的保证.广西社会主义学院学报,2010,(8):85,86
[107]邓仁伟.发展伦理视阈中的正义原则.[江西师范大学硕士研究生学位论文].南昌：江西师范大学,2008，31
[108]刘舒适.宪政传统中的罗尔斯正义理论之演变—从正义论到政治自由主义:
[湖南师范大学硕士学位论文],长沙：湖南师范大学，2003，12,13
[109]史华松.转型时期中国经济法的宪政价值探究.西南政法大学学报,2009,(4):10
[110]刘舒适.罗尔斯正义理论的宪政之维——从正义论到政治自由主义.新疆社会科学,2005,(6):15
[111]周叶中.宪法(第二版).高等教育出版社.北京：北京大学出版社,2005,183,390-391,180
[112]韩磊.正义原则与中国社会正义制度构建.黑河学刊,2009，(10):14
[113][法]托克维尔.论美国的民主(下卷).董果良译.北京：商务印书馆,2004,640
[114]戴剑波.权利正义论.北京：法律出版社,2007,137,136,148,57,119
[115]马晓燕.论当代中国社会转型期的正义问题.思想战线,2011,(4):73-75
[116]魏琼.西方经济法发达史.北京：北京大学出版社,2006,261,262,112,62
[117]王红霞,李国海.“竞争权”驳论——兼论竞争法的利益保护观.法学评论,2012,(4):99
[118]周灵方.竞争正义如何可能——反垄断法的经济伦理学批判.求索,2012，(3):118
[119]王新红.规则约束下的相机抉择——宏观调控法几个基本问题的再思考.法学论坛,2010,(9):53
[120]严颂,何跃春.经济宪政的社会和谐功能考量.重庆科技学院学报(社会科学版),2006,(6):2-4
[121][美]詹姆斯.M.布坎南.宪法秩序的经济学与伦理学.朱泱等译.北京：商务印书馆,2008,74,77,85,89
[122]唐寿宁.经济学的宪政视角——《经济学与宪政秩序的伦理学》述评.管理世界,2005,(8):167
[123]刘典金.论罗尔斯的政治正义思想及其对中国宪政建设的启示.延安大学学报(社会科学版),2009,(2):53
[124] Viktor Vanberg, James M. Buchanan. Interests and Theories in ConstitutionalChoice, Journal of Theoretical Politics,1989,1(1):49-62
[125]王世杰,钱端升.比较宪法.北京：中国政法大学出版社,2004,313
[126]蔡定剑.关于什么是宪法.中外法学,2002,(1):92-102
[127]胡锦光,秦奥蕾.宪法实践中的违宪形态研究.河北学刊,2006,(5):166-171
[128]蔡定剑,李霞.公民申请违宪审查案例分析研讨会纪要.人大与议会网http://www.e-cpcs.org/newsinfo.asp?NewSid=8296.访问日期2010-12-30
[129]郝铁川.论良性违宪.法学研究,1996,(4):83-89
[130]童之伟.良性违宪不宜肯定:郝铁川同志有关主张的不同看法.法学研究,1996,(6):102-110
[131]童之伟.宪法实施灵活性的底线——再与郝铁川商榷.法学,1997,(5):38-43
[132]王保成.宪法权威的生成机制辨析.现代法学,2004,(6):99-104
[133]杨福忠.论我国公共信任期待下的立法听证制度.武汉理工大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(4):524-528
[134][英]丹宁.法律的正当程序——丹宁勋爵和他的法学思想.刘庸安等译.北京：法律出版社,1999,9
[135]曾兆晖.公平正义的内涵、价值选择及实现困境,安庆师范学院学报(社会科学版,2011,(7):36
[136]秦前红,涂四益.“物权法之争”与宪法解释——兼与童之伟教授商榷.法学评论,2007,(3):3-8
[137]马岭.宪法修改与宪法解释.中国青年政治学院学报,2007,(2):74-77
[138]朱群芳.完善宪法解释促进法治进程.求实,2003,(10):48-50
[139]张千帆.宪法学导论——原理与应用.北京:法律出版社,2008,122
[140]韩大元.社会转型与宪法解释功能——谈建立“中国宪法解释学"的可能性.法制与社会发展,2002,(6):6-8
[141]曾瑜.论树立宪法权威.四川师范大学学报(社会科学版),2010,(2):15-19
[142]陈旭东.宪政经济学与中国经济改革的宪政问题.现代财经,2007,(2):7-10
[143]赵迅,刘焕桂.弱势群体保护的人本主义诠释.湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2009,(1):119
[144]胡鞍钢.时事观察:弱势群体如何走进“春天里”.新华网http://news.xinhuanet.com/politics/2010-11/25/c_12813554.htm.访问日期2012-10-21.