- 學位論文
歐盟民主原則之實踐─以聯盟公民權之發展為中心
The Practice of the Principle of Democracy: Focusing on the Development of EU Citizens’ Rights
若您是本文的作者，可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。
摘要
本文旨在探討歐洲聯盟（下簡稱歐盟）基礎條約中對聯盟公民之權利保障，所呈現之歐盟民主性。從國家對國民之統治關係可以得知，國家之統治力呈現為國民與國家之間之各種權利義務關係，並已有學說建立身分理論進行分類。而歐盟分享自成員國有限授予之統治權，必然使聯盟公民之權利義務關係異於國家之規範模式，而改變民主性在歐洲聯盟之實踐方式，呈現在對聯盟公民權利之特殊保障模式中。在里斯本條約使歐盟繼受歐洲共同體之法人格，並新增民主原則之規定，強調聯盟公民作為歐盟統治正當性之來源之際，對於聯盟公民權利之探討具有回顧理論與實踐之互動、並預測未來歐盟發展走向等作用。 由於聯盟公民權利為歐盟獨創之概念，且原本在主權概念下，國家因人民讓渡主權而獨占統治權，從而民主性的要求不及於國際組織。因此在進入主題之前，必須先說明經濟整合下跨越國界管制之單一市場目標，無法脫離成員國政治整合的歷史發展。而成員國國民因此產生跨國自由權，表彰歐洲三大共同體之統治力並帶出對其統治力進行民主控制需求以及聯盟公民概念的產生背景。瞭解聯盟公民概念之發展後，可知成員國國民基於聯盟公民身分所享有之遷徙及居留自由權與參政權為歐盟統治民主性之兩大支柱。前者在實踐聯盟公民跨國生活，表徵歐盟統治權之實踐結果，並隨政治整合強度之增加，被歐洲法院廣泛適用於成員國法之審查中，為歐盟統治民主性開展前提；後者則為歐盟民主正當性之來源，為直接落實民主原則的權利。而在里斯本條約的制度設計中，可以看出里斯本條約雖因受制於歐盟之權力分立架構與有限授權本質，所規定之聯盟公民權利仍有不足，然而民主原則之宣示，佐以里斯本條約納入歐盟基本權利憲章等變革，仍提供未來歐盟進一步發展強化政治參與之輔助制度，同時促使歐洲法院延續在遷徙及自由權中擴張保障範圍，及於仍發展中的社會權的可能性。
並列摘要
This essay aims at analyzing the European citizens’ rights and the value of democracy that reveals through their legal bases in fundamental treaties of European Union (the EU).According to the traditional theory, the relationship between nation states and their national is decided by the state power and presented through the whole citizens’ rights and obligations it creates, those relationship has been categorized by Jellinek’s theory of status. To the EU, whose power came from the limited authorization of it member states, the relationship between the EU and European citizens is arranged differently, which also changed the practice of democracy and the regulation of European citizenship’s rights. In the Treaty of Lisbon , the EU absorbed the European Community, acquired its legal personality and built its legitimacy through the emphasis on the principle of democracy and the role that the European citizens as the origin of legitimacy of the EU. By examining the European citizens’ rights, we can see the interaction between academic theories and legal/political practice, and then predict the future development of the EU. Before entering into the analysis, the thesis clarified the difference between international organization, the original character of the EU, and nation state under the theory of sovereignty, then introduced the historical development of the EU that made it turn from economic into politic community, which explained the requirement of individual rights in the European level and the concept of European citizen to justify its governance with the value of democracy. With the background knowledge, we can see that the freedom of move and residence and the right of political participation are the two main supports of the democracy in the EU. The freedom of move and residence made the cross-boundary political life possible for the European citizens. With the magnification of the political integration of the EU, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) also extended its application into the examination on member states’ laws in various subjects. Meanwhile, the right of political participation showed the origin of legitimacy of the governance and the concretion of the principle of democracy in the EU. Although in the Treaty of Lisbon, the norms of European citizens’ rights are still bounded by special character of the EU and show little practical improvement in a short time, the emphasis of principle of democracy, with the introduction of The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union still provide the legal base for the ECJ to strengthen democracy in the EU by developing extended political rights and social rights.
參考文獻
陳顯武、連雋偉（2008）。〈從『歐盟憲法』至『里斯本條約』的歐盟人權保障初探── 以『歐盟基本權利憲章』為重點〉，《臺灣國際法研究季刊》，4卷1期，頁25-45。
David Judge & David Earnshaw.(2008). The European Parliament. England, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Shaw, Jo. (2007). The Transformation of Citizenship in the European Union. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Nettesheim, Martin. (2005). Developing a Theory of Democracy for the European Union. Berkeley Journal of Internatonal Law. 23(2), 358-400.
Petersen, Niels. (2005). The Democracy Concept of the European Union: Coherent Constitutional Principle or Prosaic Declaration of Intent? German Law Journal. 6(11), 1507-1526.