我國國籍法「最低財力證明」立法之分析：以東南亞婚姻移民歸化國籍為例

民國18年公布施行的《國籍法》於民國89年做了重大修正。本論文主要在探討《國籍法》中，關於婚姻歸化國籍需檢附一定數額的「財力證明」所衍生之相關問題。民國90年以後，我國國民有愈來愈多迎娶東南亞籍配偶之趨勢，而提出一定數額的「財力證明」是這些外籍配偶在歸化為中華民國的國籍程序中的必要條件。本文從法制面來探討「財力證明」的立法過程、實踐經過及最終為何取消檢附「財力證明」的過程。內政部參考國外立法例，認為大多數國家對於婚姻歸化國籍都有一定的經濟條件限制，旨在避免國家社會福利資源還需救濟這些被賦予國籍者，造成政府與人民的負擔。更重要的是，嚴格審查外來者取得國籍或戶籍，是國家主權行使的一種行為。但政府並未考量，我國迎娶東南亞籍配偶者大都為男性，而這些本國籍男性本來就社經地位不高和收入偏低，政府以行政院勞工委員會所訂的平均薪資為基礎，要求他們提出相對等的「財力證明」，確實有困難。在立法委員和民間社團的積極努力下，政府體認「財力證明」對東南亞外籍配偶是一種沉重的負擔，內政部在民國97年11月14日內政部正式修正《國籍法施行細則》，取消歸化國籍需檢附一定數額的「財力證明」之規定。本文認為，此舉不僅符合憲法保障婚姻人權的精神，而且是政府苦民所苦的表現。雖然如此，《國籍法》第四條仍然規定，為中華民國國民之配偶者歸化國籍需「有相當之財產或專業技能，足以自立，或生活保障無虞」；而《國籍法施行細則》第七條也規定，申請者需檢附：(1)國內之收入、納稅、動產或不動產資料；(2)雇主開立之聘僱證明或申請人自行以書面敘明其工作內容及所得；(3)我國政府機關核發之專門職業及技術人員或技能檢定證明文件；或(4)其他足資證明足以自立或生活保障無虞之資料。換言之，婚姻歸化國籍者，申請時仍應檢附「財力證明」。本文認為，未來修法應該朝向完全取消檢附「財力證明」之方向。因為婚姻是基本人權的保障，我國政府對於國人迎娶「婚姻移民女性」，雖沒有禁止，但在法律上複雜的入籍程序，對她們形成一種「結婚容易入籍難」的障礙。本文認為，對於婚姻移民（歸化）者公民權的取得，政府不應只是消極的賦予申請者國籍，而是更應積極的協助她們去取得這些權利。

關鍵字

婚姻移民；財力證明；國籍法；歸化國籍

並列摘要

The Nationality Act promulgated in 1929 had been made a major amendment in 2000. This paper discusses the problem of "minimum financial proof" as a requisite while marriage immigrants apply for naturalization according to the Nationality Act. After 2000, more and more people marry Southeast Asian spouses, and providing a certain amount of financial proof was one of the requisites when these spouses underwent the process of naturalization. This paper probes the process of legislation, enforcement, and the reason why the government finally abolished the "minimum financial proof". The ministry of the Interior referred to the cases of Western legislation, and believed that most of countries have economic conditions and constraints on naturalization through marriage to avoid their sharing the national social welfare resources and becoming a heavy burden to the government. More importantly, rigorous review of outsiders’ obtaining nationality or domicile has been regarded as an action of national sovereignty. However, the government did not consider that most of the people who marry Southeast Asian spouses were males, who had lower income and socio-economic status in Taiwan. It was quite difficult for them to provide a certain amount of financial proof which stated they could earn an average monthly income within the R.O.C. over the past year as promulgated by the Council of Labour Affairs, Executive Yuan. After much effort by some legislators and civil societies, the government realized the "minimum financial proof" is a heavy burden for spouses from Southeast Asia, and the Ministry of Interior formally amended the Enforcement Rules of Nationality Act and promulgated on 14 November 2008. This amendment abolished the article of providing a certain amount of "financial proof" for naturalization through marriages. This paper argues this action consisted with the spirit of constitution to protect the right of marriage and basic human rights. Nevertheless, the Nationality Act Article 4 still requires those foreign spouses to prove "He/she has enough property or professional skills for his/her self-support or ensuring his/her living", and the Enforcement Rules of Nationality Act Article 10 also requires that the applicants should prepare "(1)Proof of domestic income, tax payment, moveable property or immoveable property ownership; (2)Proof of employment by the employer or written documentation of the applicant’s job content and income; (3)Certificate of a specific professional / technical skill certificate or document of technical assessment issued by a competent authority of the government; or (4)Other documents that can prove the applicant is able to be self-reliant". In other words, a person who applies for naturalization due to marriage is still required to hand in "minimum financial proof". This paper suggests the amendment of the Nationality Act and the Enforcement Rules of Nationality Act should delete all the economic conditions and constraints. As we know, marriage is protected by the basic rights. Although our government does not prohibit marriage immigrants, the complicated procedure for naturalization shows a "marriage is easy, but naturalization is difficult" phenomenon. This paper posits, for all those marriage immigrants, the government should not take a pessimistic action, but positively do his effort to help them obtaining the rights.