30 2017 6 1674-5205 2017 06-0030- 011 100872 37 Abstract Limiting the government is the function of fundamental rights. It not only forbids the governmental agencies from infringing individuals' fundamental rights when exercising their power but also prescribes that the setup of and power distribution power within a governmental agency shall not infringe fundamental rights. In this perspective the fundamental rights are the negative norms of distributing state power. Therefore the establishment and enforcement of the detention power in the reformation of administrative supervision shall also conform to the norms of fundamental rights. As detention restraints personal liberty to the extent similar to arrest a question arise whether such executive action is constitutional in regard to limiting the authority of the Organic Law under the Article 37 of the Constitution of China. Under the legal dogmatism of fundamental rights the bylaw of governing party may limit the rights of party members and a citizen may renounce his fundamental rights however both the domestic discipline and rights renouncement theories of detention action are hardly persuasive. The setup of and power distribution power within an Anti - corruption agency should be actively and steadily pushed forward the reformation under the constitution Key Words personal liberty scope of legislature authority reservations in constitution freedom of association renouncement of fundamental rights DF02 A 1 44 negative Kompetenznormen 2 2016-12 - 19 1976 1992 3
37 4 11 5 1 6 2 3 7 31 2016 3 1 Vgl. Pieroth /Schlink a. a. O S. 25. 2005 3 6 37 2 2 40 2016 2017 3 2017 1 2016 12 2017 2 2017 2 3 1 2003 5 2 2006 4
32 2017 6 25 117 122 25 19 1 142 25 2016 12 1 2017 8 3 17 1 1 1 3 1 2017 3 2 21 25 139 25 20 2 134 126 144 2017 2 < > 2017 2 2 2017 2017 2017 4 2017 2 2017 2 2017 2 3 2017 2
33 4 17 4 20 3 9 34 113 90 90 180 2017 4 14 9 2017 4 7 28 10 4 37 12 5 37 11 72-87 1 2 1 3 2017 5 2 2017 7 17 1 2017 6 2017 2 4 4 http / /china. caixin. com /2017-03 - 29 /101072187. html 2017 7 27 2017 2 2017 0828 45
34 2017 6 7 37 2 180 37 2 1 13 2 37 37 1. 37 2 2. 37 37 2 3 1 2 + 1 + 2 + 2 90 + 90 3 2 37 2 37 3 2 180 7 90 2017 4
1 2 14 15 16 47 3 8 4 9 1 3 1 > 3 5 28 90 6 5 35 7 6 7 7 8 2 < 2000 1 2000 1 20 28 2017 1 90 4 1998 6 5 http / /cpc. people. com. cn /n /2013 /0122 /c64094-20289660. html. 2017 8 2017 7 17 1 2017 7 24 1
36 2017 6 2 17 196 5 3 5 20 107-108 18 17 186 1 22 19 516 1 2 2016 70 17 206 2 1 2012 86-88 2012 4
87 83 37 21 2 1 1 Pieroth /Schlink a. a. O S. 39. 2 Merten a. a. O S. 54f.
38 2017 6 1 2 4 1. 1 2 2 1 3 2. 1 Pieroth /Schlink a. a. O S. 40. 2 3 Pieroth /Schlink a. a. O S. 39. 4 Merten a. a. O S. 56ff.
2 3 3. 39 4 15 1
40 2017 6 22 1. M.. 2014. 2 Pieroth /Schlink Grundrechte. Staatsrecht Ⅱ 25. Aufl 2009 S. 25f. 3. J. 2005 2 65-72. 4 Carl Schmitt Verfassungslehre 8. Aufl 1993 S. 126. 5. J. 2011 1 98-109. 6. J. 2017 3 163-166. 7 Vgl. Okko Behrends Einfuerungsreferat Das Buendnis zwischen Gesetz und Dogmatik und die Frage der dogmatischen Rangtufen In Gesetzgebung und Dogmatik Okko Behrends Wolfram Henckel Hrsg. 1988 S. 9ff. 8. J. 2017 2 93-104. 9 N. 2017-06 - 14 01. 10 N. 2017-06 - 01 01. 11. M.. 2016. 12. J. 2001 4 99-110. 13. J. 2017 2 61-82. 14. M. 2017 2 44-50. 15. J.. 2014 209-233. 16. M. 2015. 17. M. 2007. 18. J. 2006. 4 94-102. 19. M.. 2008. 20. M. 1986. 21 Vgl. Detlef Merten Der Grundrechtsverzicht in Horn Hrsg. Recht im Pluralismus festschrift fuer Walter Schmitt Glaeser zum 70. Geburtstag Berlin 2003 S. 67. 22. M. 2017 2 40-60.