國家安全法律義務的性質辨析

對我國憲法和國家安全法律進行系統分析可以發現，個人與組織的國家安全法律義務在性質上屬於消極性、防禦性義務，即當有危害國家安全的情形時，應承擔保衛國家安全的責任。二戰之後的特殊國際格局則使澳大利亞的情報活動與情報法律帶有明顯的攻擊性特點。而澳大利亞憲法的特殊性又使其情報配合法律義務既包括消極性、防禦性義務，也包括積極性、攻擊性義務。因此，澳大利亞對於我國國家安全法律的一般性、原則性規定存在著自身的因素，認為這些規定會強制中國企業從事攻擊性間諜活動，顯然是不能成立的。

Based on comprehensive analysis of Chinese Constitution and national security laws, this article argues that the legal obligations of individuals and entities under China’s national security laws are in essence reactive and defensive, i. e. , they shall undertake responsibility to safeguard the country when national security is threatened. In contrast, Australian intelligence activities and intelligence laws have always been offensive, by their nature, due to special international circumstances after the World War Ⅱ. Moreover, with its unique characteristics, the Australian Constitution allows its intelligence laws to impose both reactive/defensive obligations and proactive/offensive obligations. Therefore, looking at general or principal clauses in Chinese national security laws, the Australia observers would misinterpret them based on its own experiences, claiming that these stipulations would force Chinese companies to conduct offensive espionage activities. This is completely groundless.