- 期刊
- OpenAccess
憲政民主體制之政黨規制：國際準則與中華民國政黨法制比較
Political Party Regulations in Constitutional Democracy: A Comparative Study Between International Standards and the ROC's Recent Regulations
摘要
許多民主國家之憲法甚少關懷政黨問題，即使政黨已存在於政府與社會之間，並在代議體制之下扮演最重要的角色。不過自二戰以降將政黨入憲，並立法規制政黨的潮流已經逐漸發展起來。然而，制定政黨專法並非是民主體制良善運作所不可或缺的要素，從歐洲國家之經驗，特別是威尼斯委員會的研究發現:政黨專法不僅未必有助於民主，甚且，只有在政黨法制內容愈限縮節制的情況下，才能發揮其管制功能。此外，政黨法制必須參考國際準則，以免成爲執政黨壓迫在野黨的工具。基於國際標準，政黨立法不僅必須有憲法基礎，尊重法律保留，並且以尊重結社自由與政黨自治爲其核心。就此而言，我國的政黨法制，特別是新近制定的相關規範，顯然還有諸多有待改善之處。
並列摘要
Many democratic constitutions rarely pay attention to the role of political parties, despite the fact that they are crucially situated between society and government. Positively understood, key actors in any democracy are founded on the principle of representation. The tendency for political party statutes to be compiled, by constitutions or laws, gradually increased since the Second World War. However, a specific law for political parties is not a requirement for functioning democracies. In fact, a report compiled by the Council of Europe's Venice Commission on different regulatory practices of OSCE states in the realm of political parties determined that such legislation is not necessary for the proper functioning of democracy, and may be most effective when its scope is quite minimal. Parliamentary laws regulating political parties are not tools in the hands of the ruling party in order to oppress opposition parties, and therefore should be developed in conformity with both international standards and relevant jurisprudence. Based on the international standards of legal regulation of political parties, this paper argues that the role and function of political parties in a democratic system should ideally be defined in the highest legal order of the state to ensure the stability and relative permanence of these provisions. Additionally, legal regulations that affect political parties should protect free association and the internal functions of political parties should generally be free from state interference. In comparison with these international guidelines, the ROC’s recent political party regulations should be reviewed and amended in many aspects.
參考文獻
延伸閱讀
- 喬育彬（1995）。我國憲法及增修條文所規範考試權體制之比較研究。中國行政評論，4(4)，1-24。https://doi.org/10.6635/cpar.1995.4(4).01
- 陳盈樺（2010）。憲法性自主權之理論與實踐：我國相關法律修法論析〔碩士論文，國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-1610201315184719
- 楊明勳、駱長毅（2020）。從比較憲法視角探討中華民國之國家安全會議。發展與前瞻學報，(28)，67-88。https://doi.org/10.6737/JDP.202006_(28).04
- 陳怡如（2005）。Exploration on the Standards of Judicial Review Concerning the Principle of Proportionality in ROC Constitutional Court--Constitutional Analysis on J. Y. Interpretation No. 584。弘光人文社會學報，(3)，103-145。https://doi.org/10.29933/SHSS.200508.0004
- 蘇彥圖（2022）。The Constitutional Law and Politics of Fundamental Rights: Lessons from the Contemporary Substantive Due Process Jurisprudence in the United States。臺大法學論叢，51(4)，1385-1452。https://doi.org/10.6199/NTULJ.202212_51(4).0002