https://scholars.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/126177
標題: | 憲法變遷的機制與程序 | 作者: | 葉俊榮 | 關鍵字: | 憲法變遷;制憲;修憲;制憲程序;修憲程序;制憲大會;憲政主義;Constitutional Chang;Constitution Making;Constitutional Revision;Constitution-Making Process;Amendment Process Constitution;Convention;Constitutional Assembly;Constitutionalism | 公開日期: | 2005 | 出版社: | 臺北市:國立臺灣大學法律學系暨研究所 | 摘要: | 過去十多年的時間裡,是憲法變遷最活絡的年代。此一現象不僅是在台灣如 此,在國際間亦然。在台灣,從1991 年迄今已經歷了六次修憲,最近朝野政黨又 分別提出制憲或修憲的主張。在國際間,歐洲在2003 年完成歐洲憲法草案。在1990 年代開始民主化的第三波民主轉型國家,也在過去的十多年的時間裡,相繼完成 制憲或修憲。此一全球憲法變遷的活絡現象,自然也帶動了一股研究憲法的熱潮。 可惜的是,這些憲法研究往往「重實質、輕程序」,對憲法變遷的制度與程 序則欠缺關心與認知。不管各國在前一波憲法變遷的高峰中,所採取的是制憲或 修憲,究竟其修改或制訂新憲的程序是如何呢?憲法變遷的程序規範,究竟是要 由憲法來規定?或可由法律來規定?或者完全不必加以規定、聽任轉型政治的實 際發展?而主導憲法變遷的機制又該如何設計呢?一個在既有權力組織之外的 「制憲會議」是必要的嗎?還是交由國會即可?此外,新憲的制訂是否必須舉行 公民投票呢?憲法專家的參與或憲法公聽會的舉行是否亦為憲法變遷所必須涵 蓋的重要程序機制?我們要如何在當代憲政主義的要求下,以合乎民主法治原則 的方式,來建立下一階段的新秩序呢? 憲法變遷的機制與程序,不但攸關轉型過程的順利與否,更與變遷後的政治 社會的公平正義息息相關,並不可以輕忽。本計畫將從制度與程序的面向,來歸 納各國憲法變遷程序上的異同,作分析與批判。亦將從不同的民主理論來分析並 評估各種不同的憲法變遷程序,探討不同民主理論模型是否對於憲法變遷的程序 與機制有特定的偏好或要求,進一步發展出合乎當代民主憲政理念的憲法變遷程 序機制的設計與判準。 最後,本計畫擬將在憲法變遷的機制與程序的研討成果,進一步運用於台 灣。在朝野政黨相繼推出憲改時間表之後,我們必須以更嚴肅的態度來面對將來 憲改的程序。不管是憲法委員會的組成,憲改過程中的擴大民主參與程序,到公 民複決或司法審查,都需要更妥善、精密的設計與規劃。本計畫希望能對於台灣 將來憲法變遷各種可能的機制與程序,提出分析並建議一套可行的模式。 The last decade saw a vibrant development in constitutional change. This development occurred not only in Taiwan but also across borders. Locally, Six rounds of constitutional change in the 1990s marked the unprecedented constitutional development of Taiwan. Globally, European Union finished a draft Constitution in 2003 and the third-wave democracies either generated a new Constitution or tackled several rounds of constitutional revision. This exciting development has, not surprisingly, revitalized the discourse on constitutional change. Unfortunately, however, the renewed discourse has been concerned merely with the substance of change, but overlooked its institutional and procedural aspects. In the moment of constitutional change, should the procedure of change be regulated by politics, by constitution or by law? Under what principles should these procedural issues be tackled? Must we vest the power of change to constitutional convention or constitutional assembly? Or instead, ordinary parliament may be eligible for fulfilling this requirement. Will public referendum be a necessary legitimating element for constitutional change? To what extent constitutional expert may take any role in the process? All in all, what procedure to take if the new constitutional regime is built under the principle of constitutionalism, democracy and rule of law? To answer these issues, this project proposes to analyze transnational practices of constitutional change from the perspective of procedure and institution. Moreover, this project will also look into different theories of democracy and examine whether they will provide certain preferences and requirements for procedural and institutional designs of constitutional change. Certain analytical framework and evaluative standards will be developed accordingly. Finally, some conclusions will be drawn from the above transnational and theoretical examinations and apply to Taiwan ’s prospective constitutional change. After various proposals of constitutional change were put on the table by political parties, Taiwan is seeing the next wave of constitutional change and thus its procedures and institutions such as constitutional committee, enlarged citizen participation, public referendum or even judicial review must be designed with deliberation and sophistication. Hopefully, this project will be concluded with useful devices concerning those procedural and institutional designs. |
URI: | http://ntur.lib.ntu.edu.tw//handle/246246/12892 | 其他識別: | 932414H002022 | Rights: | 國立臺灣大學法律學系暨研究所 |
顯示於: | 法律學系 |
檔案 | 描述 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
932414H002022.pdf | 306.24 kB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
在 IR 系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。