中國憲法上外國人地位的反思與重述

近年來，我國行政訴訟領域屢現外國人直接援引憲法主張基本權利的案件。這引發了憲法解釋上的一個爭議：外國人是否具備中國憲法上的基本權利主體地位？儘管學界多數觀點傾向於肯定，但基於規範分析的視角審視，該主張與我國憲法文本的內在邏輯存在深層張力。從憲法整體結構出發，特別是結合第二章''公民的基本權利和義務''的規範意圖及相關條文的排他性表述可知，外國人既非我國憲法普遍承認的基本權利主體，也無法直接依據憲法條文主張特定基本權利。通過體系解釋與條文對比，並以《憲法》第32條為基礎，可將其定位為''法定權利主體''與''客觀受益對象''，即其權利主要來源於普通法律的具體設定，並在國家履行公民基本權利保障義務的過程中間接獲益。這一界定旨在推動基本權利主體理論的本土構建，並為涉外權利案件的司法裁判提供具有解釋力的規範依據。

In recent years, cases have frequently emerged in China's administrative litigation in which foreign nationals have directly invoked the Constitution to claim fundamental rights. This has triggered a core controversy in constitutional interpretation: do foreign nationals possess the status of subjects of fundamental rights under the Constitution of the PRC? Although the prevailing academic view tends to answer in the affirmative, a normative analysis reveals a profound tension between this position and the internal logic of the constitutional text. Viewed from the overall structure of the Constitution—particularly the normative intent of Chapter II,“The Fundamental Rights and Duties of Citizens,”and the exclusive wording of related provisions—it is evident that foreign nationals are neither generally recognized as subjects of fundamental rights under the Constitution nor can they directly claim specific fundamental rights based on constitutional provisions. Through systematic interpretation and a comparison of legal articles, and grounded in Article 32 of the Constitution, their status is better defined as“subjects of statutory rights”and“objective beneficiaries”; that is, their rights primarily derive from specific stipulations in ordinary legislation, and they benefit indirectly from the state's fulfillment of its obligations to guarantee the fundamental rights of citizens. This conceptualization aims to advance the localized construction of the theory of fundamental rights subjects and to provide a normatively grounded, interpretively sound basis for judicial adjudication in cases involving the rights of foreign nationals.