日本之外國人參與政治活動與居留的權利

The Right to Participate in Political Activities and Residence for Foreign Nations in Japan

在全球化的時代，人民的跨國界移動已是非常稀鬆平常，地主國要如何保護外國人的權利與自由則是一項非常重要但爭論的議題。在日本，戰後的憲法14條保障著所有的人民在法律之前一律平等而且也不許有對任何個人及團體的歧視。然而因為不同的人權性質，外國人卻無法如同日本國民受著一樣的憲法保障。在馬克林案上，最高法院認為除了因為權利性質而只能適用日本民眾之例外，憲法的保障也應該及於外國人，但是法務大臣卻可以因其政治動而拒發該外國人的簽證更新。然而最高法院的此一判決卻引發諸多爭議。許多人認為此一對行使表現自由的處罰是違法違憲的，畢竟表現自由是一種先於憲法及國家就存在的人權。本文正是以法院的判決為中心，並試著對居住日本外國人的特別是參與政治活動自由與居留權之人權的保障與限制加以檢討。

In the age of globalization, people’s cross-border movements are very common. How the host country protects foreigners’rights and freedoms is a significant but arguable issue. In Japan, Article 14 of the post-war Constitution guarantees that all people are equal under the law and that there shall be no discrimination against any person or group. Due to the different natures of human rights, however, foreign nations shall not be afforded the constitutional protection as Japanese people. In the McLean case, the Supreme Court held that the Constitution applied to foreigners except for the rights, which by their nature were applied only to Japanese people, but the Minister of Justice had the right to reject a foreigner’s visa renewal because of his political activities. The Court’s decision caused many debates. Many regard the punishment for exercising free expression, a human right that predated the Constitution and nation, as illegal and unconstitutional. This paper focuses on the court’s decisions and intends to study the guarantee and restriction of foreigners’human rights in Japan, particularly the right to participate in political activities and residence.