歐洲聯盟法院於共同外交暨安全政策機關訴訟中的角色

本文以歐盟法院就共同外交暨安全政策權限界線劃分之判決為研究對象，試圖釐清歐盟法院在歐盟機關間訴訟所適用之法理原則，並探討歐盟法院在共同外交暨安全政策權限界線劃分中所扮演的角色。本文首先探討歐盟法院於判例法中運用之機關平衡原則，靜態的觀察歐盟法院如何詮釋歐盟機關間的互動關係，並以動態的角度觀察歐盟機關平衡的演進。本文探討歐盟法院就法律依據選擇問題所發展的判例法學，分析歐盟措施選擇條約法律依據之法學方法。共同外交暨安全政策曾與發展合作政策，以及自由、安全與司法的區域產生競合併導致歐盟機關間之訴訟。在發展合作政策中的訴訟中，本文發現歐盟法院認識到發展與安全議題之間的關聯，並將發展合作權限之範疇擴大，相對地限制了共同外交暨安全政策。於自由、安全與司法的區域之機關間訴訟中，本文發現歐盟法院一改過去對發展合作政策較為寬容的態度，轉向維護共同外交暨安全政策權限的完整。本文的結論是里斯本條約前後，共同外交暨安全政策皆維持決策程序和權限性質上的獨特性，但里斯本條約改變了共同外交暨安全政策與其他權限之間的法律關係，促使歐盟法院轉往權限平衡的方向發展，從擴大共同體權限的路徑轉向維持各權限之完整。雖然歐盟法院轉向權限平衡的路徑，但透過操作機關平衡原則，歐盟法院強化了歐洲議會在共同外交暨安全政策決策程序中的地位。

關鍵字

歐盟；歐盟法院；共同外交暨安全政策；機關平衡；自由、安全與司法領域；發展合作政策

並列摘要

This thesis discusses case law of the competence regarding to the delimitation of Common Foreign and Security Policy(CFSP) established by Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The purpose of this thesis is clarifying the legal principles used by CJEU and the role of CJEU in the institutional litigation of European Union. First, this thesis explores the principle of institutional balance from two aspects. One is the static observation of how CJEU interprets institutional relationship between EU institutions, and the other one is the dynamic observation of the evolution of institutional balance. Second, this thesis explores the case law regarding to the choice of legal basis, and discusses the choice of legal basis of EU measures. In this thesis, we found that court cases of institutional litigation of CFSP overlapped with Development policy.and Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ). This thesis found that CJEU recognized the nexsus between security and development then broadened the Development policy competence. With regard to AFSJ overlapped with CFSP cases, the approach of CJEU turned to balance the competence and narrowed AFSJ competence. CFSP remain as a sui generis competence before or after Lisbon treaty. In this thesis we found Lisbon treaty changed the relationship with other community competences and CJEU turned to balance of competence approach to preserve the integrity of CFSP competence. Although CJEU narrowed the community competence, CJEU use principle of institution balance to enhance the European Parliament’s role in CFSP decision procedure.

並列關鍵字

European Union ； Court of Justice of the European Union ； Common Foreign and Security Policy ； Institutional Balance ； Development Policy ； Area of freedom, Security and Justice