2015-01-012024-05-17https://scholars.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/681735摘要：東亞國家一向以經濟為發展主軸，日本、亞洲四小龍、以及近年逐漸興起的印度及中國，均是如此。在以經濟發展為導向的管制體系下，法律及法院所扮演的角色，主要是協助政策的推行或實施，而非對政策可能引起的爭議作中立仲裁、或給予受政策影響的人民權利上的救濟。這是所謂「發展型國家」(developmental state)的法律制度及法院的典型特徵。 不過，近年來，不管是日本、韓國或台灣，甚至是中國或其他亞洲國家，在規範國家權力運作的相關法律制度上，卻逐漸遠離發展型國家的模式。法律及法院不再僅扮演協助政策實施的角色，而是監督國家的權力，對受政策影響的人民給予權利救濟，表現出「管制型國家」(regulatory state)的特色，甚至某程度已有政策決定過度「司法化」(judicialization)的現象。有趣的是，雖然東亞國家已遠離「發展型國家」的脈絡，但以經濟為主軸的發展方向並未改變，面對全球化的激烈競爭，國家發展經濟的壓力不減反增。在此背景下，東亞各國所初步展露「管制型國家」下節制政府權力的法律及保障人權的法院特色是否為真？在經濟發展的壓力下，法院是否真能保障人權，推翻重大政策或政府的開發行為？法院在政府政策與人權間是否真能公平地作成裁決？東亞法院的表現與其他管制型國家的法院有何不同？所謂東亞特色是否存在？台灣或韓國的法院表現，與一般被認為是發展型國家的香港或新加坡的法院表現又有何不同？除了從現象面及規範面的比較來探究此問題外，發展型國家與管制型國家的法律及法院特色的形成原因及背後動力，也是值得觀察的議題。 <br> Abstract: Many East Asian economies such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and more recently China have placed the focus of their primary government policies on economic developments. Legal institutions, therefore, have served as a facilitator of policy implementation but not an adjudicator or a right-protector over policy controversies, which often being characterized as a developmental state. However, recent years have witnessed the departure of legal institutions from a developmental state model to a regulatory state one. Legal institutions have not only facilitated the implementation of economic policies but have also begun overseeing the exercise of state powers and redressing individual grievances: even to the degree that can be characterized as “judicialization.” Although East Asian countries have taken off from the developmental state context, the policy focus on economic developments remains unchanged. Furthermore, the economic focus has sustained the fierce international competition under globalization. As a consequence, it is intriguing to re-examine the features of legal institutions in regulatory states in comparison with those in developmental states. How often do East Asian courts rule against economic policies in order to protect human rights? Can the courts achieve fairness in the wrestling between state policy and human rights? What are the idiosyncrasies of East Asian courts? Are there any East Asian characteristics in the role of courts in the development of states? What are the differences between courts in regulatory states, such as the ones in Taiwan or South Korea, and the courts in developmental states, such as Hong Kong or Singapore? This research analyzes these questions from both factual and normative perspectives. This research seeks to highlight the features of legal institutions in developmental or regulatory states, and to raise the causes and driving forces behind these legal and institutional appearances.發展型國家管制型國家司法化法院行政法人權Developmental StateRegulatory StateJudicializationCourtsAdministrative LawHuman Rights