國家緊急權之法制回顧與規範設計—以我國與韓國等國家實施緊急法制的經驗與理論為中心—

A Review on Constitutionalism and State Contingency: A Synthetic Overview of Contemporary National Emergency Powers,Especially Focusing on the Implementation of the ROC’S and the ROK’S Practices and Theroies

陳俊瑋(Juin-Wei Chen)

指導教授 ： 李建良

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/國家發展研究所/碩士(2010年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2010.02035

摘要

廿一世紀，全球政經局勢與安全秩序依然紛擾、動盪，1999年臺灣發生921地震、2001年美國發生911恐怖攻擊事件、2002年中國爆發SARS危機事件、2008年發生四川省汶川大地震，2009年墨西哥爆發首例H1N1新型流感隱然有疫情擴散的風險、2010年海地島發生大地震，這些災害事變、恐怖事件乃至於癘疫的緊急應變措施，足讓我們思索並檢討分析法治國家緊急應變體制的過去、現在與未來。
面對「危機連續」的時代，如何鞏固國權並保障民權，本文主張先將研究聚焦於「憲政獨裁、法治國原則與人權保障」的歷史回顧，就中研究可確知，在維護憲法秩序方面，古典的國家緊急權之運作最不易處理，容易發生濫用、誤用。尤其，當國家行政部門以維護「國家安全」或「反共、反革命、戡亂」等意識型態符碼為名，長年持續國家緊急權體制之運作，極易戕害民主憲政的發展，甚至使國政轉趨消極，由常態憲政體制轉變成為獨裁專制政治或演變成為軍事政權及軍事政變惡性循環之憲政變體。
另外，隨著時空的推移變化，當代新興國家緊急權的內涵，已與以往古典的國家緊急權內涵有所不同。本論文研究前半部以古典國家緊急權制度（憲政獨裁）為主，集中探討一次戰後威瑪德國、二次戰後韓國與臺灣憲政獨裁的比較研究，從歷史回顧發展與規範設計兩大主軸進行（國際）政治現實面、歷史面、規範面及外國法制比較四向度研究；研究時空背景及區域以戰後第二波（從威瑪德國到盟軍占領德國）及第三波民主國家（戰後韓國與臺灣）為主軸，期更深入了解古典國家緊急權制度其歷史因果脈絡；此外，在新興國家緊急權領域，鑑於新興的緊急權相關外國文獻探討已多，而國內相關專書引介仍較少見，國內相關文獻著墨偏重於就災害防救法者較多；本論文研究後半部各章乃匯集探討在緊急憲法、緊急立法領域，我國乃至各國家災害防救法、反恐措施的規範研究與分析，期能正確掌握國家緊急權之演進、發展及變化，設計出適合可行的緊急規範。

關鍵字

國家緊急權 ； 法治國原則 ； 人權保障 ； 災害防救 ； 反恐措施 ； 緊急憲法 ； 緊急立法 ； 應變措施計畫

並列摘要

Most Modern States turn swiftly to law in an emergency.The Global response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States was no exception and the wave of legislative responses is well documented. Yet there is an ever-present danger , borne out of historical and contemporary events(such as 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake in Taiwan , 2003 SARS Crisis in Hong Kong , 2008 Sichuan Earthquake In China , 2009 H1N1 pandemic flu contigency in Mexico , 2010 Haiti Earthquake and so on) , that even the most well-meaning executive , armed with emergency powers,will abuse them . And this inevitably leads to another common tendency in an emergency , to invoke law not only to empower the state,but also in a bid to constrain it.

Is the rule of law optional for liberal democratic societies ? It is hardly a new claim that in a time of emergency even liberal democracies have to suspend the rights which those subject to the law enjoy in ordinary times in order to preserve themselves. All that is new is the prevalence of the same only claim that this emergency has no foreseeable end and so is permanent , we frequently fall into.

Can law constrain the emergency state or must the state at times act outside the law when its existence is threatened? If it must act outside the law,is such conduct necessarily fatal to aspirations of legality? This thesis standing at the intersection of legal,political and social theory and practice explores law’s capacity to constrain state power in times of crisis. While there are so many eminent contigencies needed to tackle with , in face of ”consecutive crisis era” , the best solution to rebuild and consolidate state sovereignty and protect civil and political rights is to launch further probe into the problems of ambiguities for on the topic of ” Constitutional dictatorship , human rights protection and legality in a time of emergency ”.

In the first and middle part of my thesis , using well known examples from the cold war confrontations to " terrorism, insurgency , extremism and cyber espionage on so forth.” show that we need to look more closely at the kinds of conditions in which a suspension of ordinary legal regulation might occur . In addition , many questions have been asked about a state’s legal response to an emergency. Are new laws strictly necessary to cope with state contigencies? Do the state’s counter-terrorism measures strike the right balance between national security and human rights? What specific legal limits should be placed on the state’s response and which rights , if any , are non-derogatory even in times of emergency?

These are important and contentious questions about which will be discussed in the last part of my thesis. I will set out my conception about rule of law which must aspire to realize principle like Harold J.Berman and William R.Greiner’s idea that legal order must aspire to realize principles of an “ inner morality of law ” .

My thesis maintain that Constitutionism(the commonality of the rule-of-law) shows it as inter-dependent and inter-connected as a joint project, it requires cooperation between and among institutions more than the pure hypothesis of President or Supreme Court as a sole guardian of the Constitution. To sum up , The realization of the rule of law dependent on legislative and executive commitment and judicial guardianship.

並列關鍵字

National emergency powers ； rule of law ； human rights protection ； disaster assistance ； counter-terrorism measures ； emergency constitution ； emergency legislation ； contigency planning

參考文獻

王金壽，〈臺灣的司法獨立改革與國民黨侍從主義的崩潰〉，《臺灣政治學刊》，第十卷第一期，2006年6月。

柯朝欽，〈敵人、戰爭與政治秩序：史密特（Carl Schmitt）論戰爭與政治秩序的形成〉，《思與言》第46卷第1期，2008年4月；

洪貴參（1991），〈動員戡亂時期國家安全法應該廢止〉，《戡亂終止後法制重整與法治展望論文集》，台北：中國比較法學會。

張文貞，〈中斷的憲法對話：憲法解釋在憲法變遷脈絡的定位〉，《台大法學論叢》32卷第6期，2003年。

葉俊榮、張文貞，〈轉型法院與法治主義：論最高行政法院對違法行政命令審查的積極趨勢〉，《人文及社會科學集刊》第14卷第4期，2002年。