國際及區域人權公約在憲法解釋中扮演的角色

The Role of International / Regional Human Rights Treaties in Constitutional Interpretation

黃舒芃(Shu-Perng Hwang)

《臺灣民主季刊》 13卷1期 (2016/03) Pp. 85-129

摘要

本文旨在探討國際及區域人權公約在憲法解釋中應該扮演的角色。透過對德國當代發展經驗及相關爭議之借鏡與檢討，本文主張：唯有從框架秩序的角度理解國際人權規範，才能在「接納國際人權法對本國基本權的影響」，以及「確保本國基本權的自主形成空間」兩者之間，找到真正的平衡。根據這個觀點，本文除了進一步分析我國憲法學界基於現實條件和理論傳統的不同，如何以乍看之下和德國主流見解大異其趣的方式，面對國際化的潮流，更指出在這樣的表面差異背後，其實蘊含了共同的基本想法，也就是都認為：國際人權規範和本國憲法的基本權規定之間，係處於「異質，因此必須擇一」的關係。然而，這樣的基本想法，不僅忽略了國際人權公約對各國憲法基本權規範的任務授權，也忽略了正是基於這種任務授權，各國憲法的基本權規定在將國際人權公約具體化的過程中，一方面仍保有相當程度的自主形成空間，另一方面也因此而能夠且有義務透過各國自己認為最適合的方式，協助實現國際人權公約所追求人權保障的目標。在這個理論基礎之上，本文以兩公約在我國的實踐脈絡為例，強調在我國特殊的國際處境背景下，少數在我國已完成批准或加入的國際人權公約，適足以作為我國憲法所依循、從而作為憲法解釋與具體化依據的框架秩序。從這個角度而言，兩公約、消除對婦女一切形式歧視公約、身心障礙者權利公約、兒童權利公約，以及在退出聯合國前即已批准的國際勞工公約，對我國憲法秩序來說，都因與我國之間的密切關係而別具特殊意義，其重要性與具體功能因此必須與絕大多數我國未完成批准或加入的國際或區域人權公約有所區分。

關鍵字

國際人權公約 ； 區域人權公約 ； 基本權 ； 憲法解釋 ； 一元論 ； 框架秩序

並列摘要

This article intends to clarify the role of international as well as regional human rights treaties in constitutional interpretation especially from a comparative perspective. Through contrasting developments in Germany on one hand and in Taiwan on the other hand, it elucidates the characteristics of difficulties in Taiwan in comparison with most other countries whose international status is generally recognized by international law. Based on this presupposition, this article continues to analyze why and how the international human rights instruments become important to constitutional interpretation by the Taiwanese Constitutional Court and then criticizes its uncritical reception of all international/regional human rights treaties or conventions. It argues that, while Taiwan encounters problems that are very different from the situation in Germany, the mainstream opinions in Taiwan with regard to the role of international human rights treaties in national law and especially in constitutional interpretation show similar myths with German discussions, as they presuppose (as well) that national law and international law are two qualitatively different and therefore incompatible legal orders, so that the reception of international legal norms inevitably leads to its substitute for national law, including national constitutional law and constitutional rights. From the viewpoint of this article, though, such opinions misconstrue the relationship between international and national legal norms and thereby fail to understand the international and regional human rights treaties as a framework order, which authorizes national laws to concretize international human rights instruments and in this way binds the national legal orders at the same time. This article thus contends that the concrete role of international or regional human rights treaties in constitutional interpretation in Taiwan should depends on whether these human rights treaties have been recognized as the framework order of Taiwanese legal system, that is to say, whether they have been approved by Taiwan’s parliament and in this way incorporated into Taiwanese law.

並列關鍵字

International Human Rights Treaties ； Regional Human Rights Treaties ； Constitutional Rights ； Constitutional Interpretation ； Monism ； Framework Order

參考文獻

吳煜宗(2011)。《兒童權利公約》與臺灣親子法─再訪子女知其出自的權利與釋字第587號解釋。台灣國際法季刊。8(2)，151-88。

李建良()。

林佳範(2010)。論兩公約對憲法人權保障的補充─一個初步架構的探討。全國律師。14(3)，23-41。

姜皇池(2013)。國際公法導論。臺北市=Taipei:新學林=New Sharing Publishing Co. Ltd。

徐揮彥(2014)。「公民與政治權利國際公約」與「經濟、社會與文化權利國際公約」在我國最高法院與最高行政法院適用之研究。國立臺灣大學法學論叢。43(特刊=Special Issue)，839-909。