正義、戰爭與法權：格勞秀斯法理論之研究

Abstract

本研究以十七世紀荷蘭法學家胡果·格勞秀斯（Hugo Grotius）的《論戰爭與和平法》（De Jure Belli ac Pacis）為核心，探討其如何以自然法為基礎，結合正義（iustitia）與法權（ius）兩大概念，建立能夠調和道德要求與政治現實的戰爭法體系。核心問題在於：格勞秀斯如何在著作中推進此一法理體系，並藉由論證，同時對戰爭行為施加道德約束，又維持其在現實政治中的可行性。 據此，我指出格勞秀斯如何在十七世紀的歷史脈絡中，以「義務」（obligatio）為法權核心、以正義為原則，並結合懲罰權等正當理由與內在正義，建構出兼具規範與實用性的戰爭法理。格勞秀斯在書中將正義、法權與戰爭視為彼此獨立的研究對象，因此本文由「正義」與「法權」兩項概念切入，分析他先界定法權的三種定義，再論述正義的內涵，並於戰爭情境中嚴格區分二者的適用範圍。其正義觀受亞里斯多德影響，簡化為分配正義（attributrice iustitia）與補償正義（expletrix iustitia）兩種形式，並在討論戰爭正當理由與戰爭法時反覆運用。 本論文章節安排如下：導論闡明本文研究背景與問題意識為何以「正義與戰爭」的母題為主軸。第一章聚焦〈序言〉（Prolegomena），分析格勞秀斯如何釐清並理論化法權的三重定義，並透過選擇性挪用與再詮釋古典文本，推展兼具學術權威與政治適用性的戰爭法論述。第二章探討法權與正義的界定與關聯，重點在於二者如何分開討論後再結合，作為戰爭規範與正當性理由的基礎。第三章集中於第二卷第二十章，分析懲罰權（ius puniendi）作為戰爭正當理由的遞進，並說明其如何從個體層面擴展至國際間的社群關係。第四章探討第三卷關於戰爭中的行為規範，指出格勞秀斯如何將理論根據轉向萬民法，接著引入「內在正義」（iustitia interna）以設立更高的道德門檻；同時要求行動者即便形式上合法，仍須基於愛（caritas）與節制（temperamentum）來約束其行為。結論部分則回顧本研究論點，並簡要說明其對當代的啟示。 除關注正義觀與法權理論外，本文亦釐清全書內部結構，說明格勞秀斯如何藉由章節安排與語義鋪陳，構築一貫的戰爭法論述。特別是，「非不正義」（non iniustum）作為自然法與萬民法之間的中介，以及「內在正義」（interna iustitia）作為高於合法性的道德要求，使其戰爭法同時兼顧外在秩序與內在倫理。。 總體而言，儘管在語義統計與同時代跨文本比較方面仍有深化空間，本研究主要貢獻在於：以原典逐章詮釋為基礎，輔以既有文獻，深化對格勞秀斯戰爭法理的分析；在此基礎上，該戰爭法必須以自然法為根基，方能使萬民法與之並行運作，且賦予「內在正義」充分的規範說服力。

This study focuses on Hugo Grotius’s The Law of War and Peace (De Jure Belli ac Pacis, 1625/1631/1645; JBP) and examines how he constructs a legal framework for war by grounding it in natural law and integrating the concepts of justice (iustitia) and legal right (ius). I argue that Grotius develops a system that reconciles moral imperatives with political realities, advancing a legal framework that imposes moral constraints on warfare while ensuring its practical applicability. I contend that, within the seventeenth-century historical context, Grotius places obligation (obligatio) at the core of ius and justice as its guiding principle. By incorporating just causes such as the right to punish (ius puniendi) and the concept of internal justice (iustitia interna), he constructs a theory of the law of war that is both normative and pragmatic. Treating justice, ius, and war as distinct objects of inquiry, Grotius defines three meanings of legal right, articulates the content of justice, and strictly distinguishes their respective applications in war. Influenced by Aristotle, he reduces justice to distributive justice (attributrice iustitia) and corrective justice (expletrix iustitia). This reduction is applied repeatedly in his discussions of just war and the laws of war. The dissertation is structured as follows. The introduction outlines the research background and frames the study around the theme of iustitia and bellum.” Chapter 1 examines the connection between the Prolegomena and the main texts. This correlation clarifies and theorizes the threefold definition of ius and selectively reinterprets classical texts to produce a doctrine that balances academic authority and political applicability. Chapter 2 explores the definitions and relationship of ius and justice. In this way, it shows how Grotius discusses them separately before integrating them as the foundation for the normative and justificatory aspects of war. Chapter 3 analyzes Book II, Chapter 20 of JBP, where the right to punish (ius puniendi) serves as a progressive justification for war, extending from individual to international contexts. Chapter 4 addresses Book III of JBP on wartime conduct. I demonstrate how Grotius shifts his theoretical basis to the law of nations (ius gentium) and introduces internal justice (iustitia interna) as a higher moral threshold. This principle requires that even lawful actions be restrained by charity (caritas) and moderation (temperamentum). The conclusion reviews the main arguments and considers their contemporary implications. Beyond analyzing Grotius’s concepts of justice and legal right, this study clarifies the internal structure of JBP, demonstrating how he uses chapter organization and semantic development to construct a coherent law-of-war discourse. Notably, “not unjust” (non iniustum) functions as a bridge between natural law and the law of nations, while internal justice (interna iustitia) establishes a moral standard beyond legality. This dual framework ensures that Grotius’s law of war addresses both external order and internal ethics. Though further research may expand semantic and comparative analysis, the study’s principal contribution is its chapter-by-chapter exegesis, informed by existing scholarship, of the original text. On this basis, the study supports the view that Grotius’s law of war should be understood as grounded in natural law, in order for the law of nations to operate alongside it and for internal justice to possess genuine normative authority.