由瑞士的公民投票制度檢視我國全國性公民投票 之理論與實踐

A Comparative Study of the Nationwide System of Referendum in Taiwan and in Switzerland

喬玟敏(Wen-Min Chiao)

指導教授 ： 葛永光

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/國家發展研究所/碩士(2007年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2007.03281

摘要

我國公民投票法已於2003年11月27日通過，我國並於2004年3月20日與總統大選合辦了我國第一次全國性的公民投票。但是不論是我國現行的公民投票法以及至今唯一一次全國性公民投票的實踐經驗，皆在國內產生諸多爭議。故屆至2007年，立法院內已有七種不同的公民投票法修正條文提交審議，惟仍因各政黨間對於公民投票認知差異，至今仍未取得共識。
相對於我國全國性公民投票僅正式實行四年即爭議不斷，瑞士數百年的直接民主實踐經驗，造就瑞士成為當今世界進行公民投票最頻繁的國家，可稱得上是世界施行直接民主，成功國家的典範，因此，本文試圖藉由對於瑞士全國性公民投票制度及實踐經驗的介紹，用以比較我國現行及修正中之全國性公民投票規範，以作為我國全國性公民投票制度設計之參考。
本文以文獻分析、法條詮釋、及比較研究途徑為主軸，發現我國不若瑞士在全國性公民投票的運行上穩健的主因在於我國國內各黨派及人民因過去台灣公民投票發展的歷史充滿台灣獨立色彩，而台獨本身在國內即存在歧見的前提下，使得公民投票連帶在國內存在對其兩極化的評價；相對來說，瑞士的政府及人民對於直接民主的開放態度使得公民投票能大放光彩。因此本文建議，如要在我國真正建立起長久的公民投票制度，首先一定要掌握「平衡」原則－在立法的內容取得朝野意見的平衡：目前在台灣唯一能取得朝野間對公投意見一致的方式，就是如同瑞士，將公投的發動權完全回歸交付於人民之手；同時，為使直接民主的正當性彰顯，應採「公投發動門檻寬，但通過門檻嚴」的方式；另外，若要使直接民主真正在代議主流中發揮影響力，我國公投設計應仿照瑞士，排除「諮詢性公投」的立法，令所有公投的結果皆具備實質拘束力。

關鍵字

公民投票 ； 直接民主 ； 瑞士 ； 創制複決 ； 統獨

並列摘要

The Referendum law in Taiwan was officially enacted on November 27, 2003, and the first nationwide referendum was later held along with the presidential election in the next year, on March 20, 2004.However, both the law mentioned above and the only nationwide referendum practice so far have been criticized by either politicians in varied parties as well as luminaries. Therefore, since 2004, there have been seven different kinds of amendments to the currently-implemented referendum law presented in the Legislative Yuan in Taiwan, waiting to be ratified and adopted. Nevertheless, due to discrepancies as regards the statutes regulating referendum among parties in the congress, no consensus has been reached.
In contrast to the contentions stemming from the four-year period since the passage of the present referendum law, the century-old experience of practicing direct democracy has created Switzerland ,a so-called paradigm of a successful model in referendum practice, to be the country where referendum has been adopted most frequently in the world; thus, an overview of the referendum in Switzerland , both the statutes related and the experiences in the past included, is introduced and compared with both the current referendum law and the seven versions of amendments in Taiwan in this master thesis, as a practical reference to either the modification or design of the regulations related to the nationwide referendum in Taiwan.
Based on such approaches of analyses on assorted academic materials, interpretations of laws, and systematic comparison, it has been discovered in the research that the close association between supporters of referendum and those of independence of Taiwan in history is the main reason why the referendum practiced in Taiwan is not as stable as that performed in Switzerland. Regardless of the true function of referendum, polarized points of view as concerns whether such voting should be allowed have been posed since whether leaders of Taiwan should declare independence , a past synonym to referendum here, has been constantly argued. In contrast, both the government and the citizens in Switzerland have consistently held optimistic and supportive attitude towards the effect and necessity of direct democracy, which has directly led to the general acceptance of results gained from referendum. In view of the inherent difference in attitude above, suggestions as follows are made in the research：In order to build a stable system of referendum, equilibrium in opinions concerning referendum between competitive parties in the congress should be attained first. However, the only way to reach consistency with reference to the issue of referendum in Taiwan is to grant solely legal permission to the citizens here to file proposals for referendum by refusing institutes or other government officials other than people to propose the request of referendum. To manifest the effectiveness of direct democracy, in the meantime, a stricter threshold of the passage or adoption of a referendum result accompanied by an easier application of a referendum proposal ought to be assumed in the future amendment of the current referendum law in Taiwan. Moreover, like Switzerland, the referendum regulated in Taiwan should exclude the application of “policy vote”of any kind since it is not binding at all, and the only way to genuinely demonstrate the influence of direct democracy in the mainstream of indirect democracy is to make the results of all kind of referendum binding.

並列關鍵字

referendum ； direct democracy ； plebiscite ； Switzerland ； policy vote

參考文獻

李昌麟，〈全球公民投票制度之探討〉，《全球政治評論》，第6期，2004年4月，頁123-148。

李俊增，〈從Schmitt之民主理論論臺灣三二○公投〉，《政治科學論叢》，第26卷，2005年12月，頁1-35。

張台麟，〈瑞士的公民投票：理論與實踐〉，《問題與研究》，第35卷，第9期，1996年9月，頁39-48。

湯紹成，〈從直接與間接民權的角度檢視瑞士與法國的公民投票制度〉，《問題與研究》，第39卷，第2期，2000年2月，頁67-78。

羅際芳、林文清，〈我國公民投票法爭議議題之研究--以全國性公民投票之議題為對象〉，《弘光人文社會學報》，第6卷，2007年5月，頁337-362。