從基本國策執行檢討違憲審查模式：兼論財產權與基本國策衝突

The Implementation of Basic National Policy and Judicial Review Models: The Conflict between Property Rights and Basic National Policy

楊智傑(Chih-Chieh Yang)

《中正大學法學集刊》 28期 (2010/01) Pp. 121-185

https://doi.org/10.30094/NCCULJ.201001.0003

摘要

本文認爲，憲法中基本國策，應是英美憲法學界所稱的社會權。我國基本國策既然規定如此多的條文，就應該予以重視。社會權的執行，一般認爲涉及國家財政支出與分配，而大法官無能力也無相關資訊，可以替政府部門作財政的分配。所以一般認爲，不建議將社會權入憲，或者就算入憲，也建議不賦予其效力，司法審查原則上不介入。倘若涉及國家財政分配，真的是司法不介入社會權的理由；那麼防禦權的保護，其實也需要政府花錢，難道司法就可以介入？本文將提出質疑與分析。 進而，假設社會權已經入憲，我們該採取如何的保障方式？此又可以分成兩個層面，一是社會權內涵的強弱，二是違憲審查效力的強弱。本文將兩者綜合搭配討論，而採取Mark Tushnet的建議，應該採取強的社會權，及搭配弱勢違憲審查。其重點在於，這種方式能減少違憲審查對社會進步不必要的阻礙，以避免出現大法官以財產權、契約自由爲理由，而阻礙基本國策與社會福利的推展，也避免再度出現釋字580解釋的奇怪結果。

關鍵字

基本國策 ； 社會權 ； 財產權 ； 強勢違憲審查 ； 弱勢違憲審查 ； 國家財政負擔

並列摘要

This article holds that the basic national policy of the Constitution may be referred to social rights in the Anglo-American constitutional academics. Since there are many provisions of basic national policy in Taiwan's Constitution, we should take it seriously. It is generally believed that the implementation of social rights involved in the distribution the state financial expenditure, and Justices have no relevant information to make decisions for political departments. So it is generally recommended not to put social rights in constitution, or even they were putted in Constitution, it is also recommended not to give they effects. If the reason not to implement the social rights is the state's financial allocation, we should take the same criteria to review the judicial interpretation of defense rights.
Further, given that social rights have been in the constitution, what judicial review model should we take? We can divide it to two levels, one is strong/weak of rights, and another is strong/weak of judicial review. The strong judicial review means that the Justices declare laws invalid finally and definitely. The weak model means that Justices don't declare laws invalid and just provide some insights or suggestions for congress. After integrated the two levels, I discussed the proposal Mark Tushnet provide. He suggested that we should take strong rights associated with weak judicial review. In this way, we can avoid that the Justices using the property rights to invalid the laws implement the basic national policy. It also can avoid Justices to settle unnecessary obstacles to social progress.

並列關鍵字

basic national policy ； social rights ； property rights ； strong judicial review ； weak judicial review ； the state's financial burden