作為城市的北京與作為首都的北京

《憲法》第143條作為首都條款不僅具有一般國家標誌的象徵意義，更對回應當下一系列改革的迫切需求具有特殊的規範價值。針對該條的核心要素，應從事實和規範兩個層面分別對“首都”和“北京”進行深入解析。“首都是北京”的表達既是事實描述，也是命令規範，其所蘊含的作為特殊中央與地方關係的“都－城”關係，實為解決諸如京津冀協同發展、非首都功能疏散、雄安新區建設等問題的邏輯和規範基礎。可在借鑒域外經驗的基礎上，有效協調北京的城市功能和首都功能的關係，並通過《首都法》最終實現規範化目標。

The Capital plays the function as a national symbol. Accordingly, Article 143 on the Capital of the nation has not only a symbolic meaning, but also a normative meaning in response to the pressing needs of current reforms. As the essence of Article 143 of the PRC Constitution, the two words, ''Capital'' and ''Beijing'', shall be thoroughly scrutinized from both empirical and normative perspectives. The prescription of ''Capital is Beijing'' in Article 143 describes a fact, which could be regarded as an order as well, implying the complicated relationships between the central and local governments. On the basis of the interpretation of Article 143, the coordinative developments in the Beijing-Hebei-Tianjin area, the resolutions to dismantle the non-capital-function from the metropolitan functions, and the construction of the new district of Xiong’an, might all be achieved to some extent. The article will analyze this important legal issue from a comparative perspective, recommend some solutions to coordinate different functions of Beijing, as a city and a capital, and help to achieve it eventually by a Law of the Capital.