從兩岸經濟合作架構協議簽署論我國行政立法關係

Probing Legal Relations between Administration and Legislative Based on the ECFA

陳滄海(Chen-Tsang Hai)

《政策與人力管理》 2卷1期 (2011/07) Pp. 115-148

https://doi.org/10.29944/PPM.201107.0004

摘要

我國海基會與大陸海協會二○一○年六月二十九日在重慶簽署了兩岸「經濟合作架構協議」（Economic Cooperation Framewok Agreement,ECFA）。這項決議從討論、談判到批准過程，爭議不斷，先是反對黨與立法院都主張該項協議應先經立法院審查，再由行政部門簽署，也就是所謂的「先審後簽」，但行政院則認為應先簽後審；其後在簽署之後，各方對於經濟合作協議是否為條約，及在立法院審議時得否逐條審議修正而爭論不已。此乃顯示我國長期以來行政、立法之間憲政規範不確定性的隱憂。雖然憲法明文規定行政院對立法院負責，也對兩院之分權有原則性之規範，但在實務運作上一直存在著一些權限之爭議。基於此等背景，乃亟思以兩岸經濟合作架構協議之簽署程序議題，進而探討我國的行政立法關係，經從文獻分析，及制度、比較等方法，探討經濟合作協議的法理及兩院相關之互動影響。經研究認為，兩岸並非一般國與國關係，雙方所簽署的協議自不屬於條約案，但基於行政院對立法院負責，及尊重國會的民主機制，應由立法院審議通過，乃屬當然，至於立法院亦應以國家整體利益為重，並依相關規範及慣例，進行全案之議決，以符法制。

關鍵字

條約 ； 憲政規範 ； 先審後簽 ； 行政立法關係 ； 兩岸經濟合作架構協議

並列摘要

The Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF) and the Association for Relations across the Taiwan Straits (ARATS) established the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement between Taiwan and China (ECFA) in June 2010. Prior to this, there had been disagreement about the terms of the ECFA. The opposition political parties and the Legislative Yuan claimed that the proposal should have been reviewed by the Legislative Yuan before it was formally signed. However, the Executive Yuan argued that it should have been signed prior to such a review. Is the ECFA tantamount to a treaty? Should it be clause-by-clause reviewed by the Legislative Yuan? These issues have been discussed and debated ever since. This dispute between the Executive and the Legislative Yuans shows the incertitude of Taiwan's legal system. The Constitution indicates that the Executive Yuan is accountable to the Legislative Yuan, but the legal relationship between the two branches is open to question. It is therefore necessary to look at the literature, compare legal systems, and examine the process of cross-Strait economic cooperation, as well as the relationship between the Executive Yuan and the Legislative Yuan. Cross-Strait relations between the People's Republic of China and Taiwan do not fall into the category of conventional international relations. This paper proposes that the agreement signed by the SEF and ARATS is not tantamount to a treaty. The Executive Yuan should be accountable to the Legislative Yuan, and respect its contribution to the democratic system. It is correct legal procedure for the ECFA to have first been approved by the Legislative Yuan, which should prioritize national benefits and follow the Constitution.

並列關鍵字

Treaty ； Constitutional convention ； Review before signing ； Relationship between Executive Yuan and Legislative Yuan ； Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement between Taiwan and China (ECFA)