- 期刊
轉型正義作為法治國的憲法價值：司法院大法官釋字第793號解釋分析
On Transitional Justice as a Constitutional Value: An Analysis on the Interpretation No. 793 of the Taiwanese Judicial Yuan
摘要
釋字第793號解釋首次明確承認了「轉型正義」乃是憲法上「特別重要之公共利益」。從30年轉型正義之路的角度來看，深入理解釋字第793號解釋提出何種論證，便同時具有憲法和轉型正義的理論與實務價值。本文從而將聚焦於「釋字第793號解釋承認轉型正義作為法治國價值之論證構成的憲政影響」。綜覽解釋全文，可以發現本號解釋針對政黨財產權限制，採取了完整且環環相扣的規範違憲審查架構，如同基本權審查的範本。但必須強調的是，釋字第793號解釋不管是在尋繹黨產條例的立法目的或是權衡衝突法益，其時間面向都限定在「轉型後」：黨產條例是因為追求「未來的政黨公平競爭」而具有目的正當性，政黨財產權和機會平等的保障內涵也都是在「轉型後民主國家」的框架下認知，並以此為基準進行衡量。在轉型正義的脈絡中，這種單向的時間性有其侷限和風險。一方面，指向於「轉型後制度影響」的論證，無法應用在個人行為責任事後追究和個人權利損害事後填補的案例類型。另一方面，如果把「指向未來」的論證理解成忽視甚至排除「過去時間向度」的考量，就可能悖離了形式合法與實質正義衝突、以一貫的實質正義標準（向過去）重新評價形式合法行為並藉此（向未來）踐行憲政價值承諾的轉型正義思維。
並列摘要
Since the Interpretation No. 793 of the Taiwanese Judicial Yuan, for the first time in the history, acknowledged transitional justice to be an ＂especially significant public interest＂, it is of high value to analyze this Interpretation. In this light, this essay aims to clarify possible influences of the decision of Grand Justices to recognize transitional justice as an essential part of rule of law. While the Interpretation No. 793 scrutinized relevant restrictions on party assets under a comprehensive framework of judicial review, it is worth noting that the Taiwanese Constitutional Court legitimized the Act Governing the Settlement of Ill-gotten Properties by Political Parties and Their Affiliate Organizations (the Act of Ill-gotten Properties) exclusively on the basis of the negative influences of ill-gotten properties on the future regime. More specifically, the Act of Ill-gotten Properties was justified by its purpose of preventing unfair competition between political parties and its balance between property right and equal opportunities in a transited, free and democratic system. However, such a one-dimensional perspective would backfire on transitional justice, because it not only overlooks cases regarding backward compensation and persecution, but dismisses the essence of transitional justice, that is, re-evaluation of formal legality on the basis of consistent substantial legitimacy.
延伸閱讀
- 陳忠五（2021）。轉型正義與不當黨產處理原則：司法院釋字第793號解釋之後。黨產研究，(6)，5-36。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=P20180214002-202106-202107080032-202107080032-5-36
- 曾建元、謝秉憲（2001）。民主政治、立憲主義與司法審查－司法院大法官議決釋字第四九九號解釋評釋－。育達研究叢刊，(2)，1-27。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=a0000131-200106-x-2-1-27-a
- 葉俊榮（2002）。從“轉型法院”到“常態法院”：論大法官釋字第二六一號與第四九九號解釋的解釋風格與轉型脈絡。臺大法學論叢，31(2)，59-96。https://doi.org/10.6199/NTULJ.2002.31.02.02
- 楊泰順（2005）。The Conflict of National Identities and the Dilemma of Constitutional Reforms in Taiwan: Two Inseparable Independent Issues。臺灣民主季刊，2(3)，1-31。https://doi.org/10.6448/TDQ.200509.0001
- 張哲瑋、張漢川（2012）。A Discussion of the Juridical Remedy for College Student's Right through the Perspective of the Fundamental Constitutional Rights: The Impact of No. 684 Interpretation of Constitutional Court in Taiwan。嘉義大學通識學報，(10)，93-128。https://doi.org/10.7042/JYDXTSXB.201211.0093