我國違憲審查中「政治問題」之研究

A Study of the Political Question of The Judicial Review for The ROC

齊光裕(KUNG-YUE CHI)

指導教授 ： 李炳南

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/三民主義研究所/博士(2001年)

摘要

強調權力分立的現代立憲制度中，司法審查是否有其界線？「政治問題」此一法律與政治間困惑不清的議題，有全面檢視之必要。民主立憲國家當中，凡憲政運作發生之爭議，是否均可由司法機關予以明白裁判？是否有「政治問題」之憲法問題？若有，司法之「最終局裁判」作何解？若無，歐、美、日乃至我國實際判例中之狀況作何解？簡言之，以「政治問題」拒絕裁判的理由為何？標準為何？合理性為何？皆有待釐清、辨證。
本論文透過「理論研究途徑」、「歷史研究途徑」，從憲法優位、權力分立、多數決原則等根本的政治哲學相關核心理論出發，探索相關問題。諸如：國家的政策決定是否會從代表民意的立法機關、行政機關，移轉到司法機關？是否釋憲機關會變成「準立法權」或「太上立法機關」？權力分立的制衡真正意涵為何？司法違憲審查是否有其界線？
經過理論的思考、沈澱，用以具體檢視我國「大法官會議」、美國「聯邦最高法院」在釋憲的案例運作中，使用「政治問題」的原因、效果及得失。
本論文在經過理論、實際運作上的分析，發現「政治問題」在釋憲上將產生：定義不明確、邏輯不周延、迴避憲法責任、解釋互有矛盾、遷就政治現實等缺失。故而政治實際面上雖存有政治問題的情形，本文綜合各層面研究結果，傾向司法違憲審查不宜以「政治問題」拒絕之。並提出司法違憲審查制度強化的作法：釋憲制度的改善、釋憲方法的重視、釋憲救濟的途徑，期健全我國釋憲制度。

關鍵字

大法官會議 ； 司法違憲審查 ； 政治問題 ； 憲法優位 ； 權力分立 ； 多數決原則 ； 布瑞南準則 ； 司法自制

並列摘要

Emphasizing on the separation of power is the keystone for modern constitutionalism. However, is there a boundary for judicial review? To clarify this issue, a complete review on the tangle between laws and politics that caused by “political questions” is unavoidable. In constitutional democracies, are all constitutional disputes articulately adjudged by judicial organizations? Are there any constitutional questions embedded with political questions? If yes, how is the adjudgement ad final made by the judicial branch defined? If not, how are the current practices of adjudgement among Europe, America, Japan and the ROC explained? In brief, what is the reason for refusing to adjudge by using political questions? What are the criteria of not using political questions? Are they reasonable? These are all the issues that needed to be resolved.
The methodology of study is based on theoretical approach and historical approach. It started with the discussion on several core concepts of political philosophy, including constitutional supremacy, the separation of power, and the doctrine of majority decision. Then, the study focused on questions like “Will the policy-making mechanism shift away from legislation and executive branches to judicial branch?” “Will judicial review organization become quasi-legislative entity or super legislature?” “What is the meaning of power balance based on the separation of power?” and “Is there any boundary for judicial review?”
The assessment on these theoretical issues enabled the study to examine the cause, effect, cost and benefit of the political questions existing in the practices of the ROC Council of Grand Justices and the US Federal Supreme Court.
The study concluded that the political questions indeed lead to some predicaments for judicial reviews. These problems include obscure definition, incomplete logic, avoidance of constitutional responsibility, contradictions amid interpretations, and compromise with political reality. In spite of these negative issues related to political questions, the study suggests that the judicial reviews should not get involved with political questions. In addition, the study also recommends several means and approaches to strengthen the ROC system of judicial reviews.

並列關鍵字

Council of Grand Justices ； Judicial Review ； political question ； doctrine of constitutional supremacy ； doctrine of seperation of power ； doctrine of majority decision ； Brenan Test ； judicial self－restraint

參考文獻

51.張世賢，《比較政府概要》。台北：中華民國公共行政學會，民國八十一年六月。

3.史錫恩，＜司法院掌理審判之研究＞，《律師通訊》，第一六九期，民國八十二年十月。

16.李鴻禧，＜司法審查的政策形成功能底緒說－－以立法權與司法審查為著眼＞，《台大法學論叢》，第廿五卷，第一期，民國八十四年十月。

17.李惠宗，＜國家組織法的憲法解釋－－兼評法院大法官會議釋字第三八七與四一九號解釋＞，《台大法學論叢》，第廿六卷，第四期，民國八十六年七月。

22.林子儀，＜言論自由之理論基礎＞，《台大法學論叢》，第廿五卷，第一期，民國八十四年十月。