政黨及其附隨組織不當取得財產處理條例之研究

A Study on the Act Governing the Settlement of Ill-gotten Properties by Political Parties and Their Affiliate Organizations

高俊宏(Chun-Hung Kao)

指導教授 ： 周繼祥

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/國家發展研究所/碩士(2018年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201800475

摘要

2016年7月25日，立法院三讀通過「政黨與其附隨組織不當取得財產處理條例」，這是台灣轉型正義首部重要法案，象徵台灣踏出轉型正義的第一步。
我國的分期付款式民主化，導致我國一直未能徹底執行轉型正義，回顧與反省過去的威權體制。中國國民黨利用國會多數黨地位，不斷阻擾本條例的通過，致使立法延宕十六年，無論對於黨本身的轉型，或是國內的公平政黨政治，都是有害無益的。
本條例大抵承襲2002年至2005年間行政院版黨產條例草案而來，雖名為繼受德國法，然德國與我國立法的背景有相當的不同，在立法政策上不可能完全繼受，就規範目的及立法邏輯，兩者並無二致。綜觀整部條例，其立法精神在於鑑於我國過去歷經長期戒嚴，國家與政黨之間未能嚴守分際，政黨違背政黨本質不符實質法治國原則所取得之財產，長久以來備受各界非議。惟如依現行法律規定請求政黨返還，則因時日間隔久遠，受制於時效或其他因素而難以達成，況且，政黨不當黨產取得有其特殊政治背景，司法訴追困難，只能特別立法方式處理以還財於民，俾建立政黨公平合理競爭機制，確保政黨財務透明公開，以落實我國民主憲政發展。
本法施行後的主要影響有兩大面向，其一，對我國政黨政治之影響。預期到外來沒有黨產奧援的中國國民黨，已經開始積極著手轉型，進而提升政黨的運作效率，重新回到思考民意基礎上，回歸政策和議題導向，靠著政治理念獲得人民的支持，依賴有民意基礎的政治獻金參予選舉，以達本條例「建立政黨公平競爭環境」之立法目的。其二，對我國司法之影響。法院過去在處理轉型正義議題上之案件較為保守，我國司法機關在無法全然否認戒嚴時期威權統治正當性的情況下，遇到轉型正義的案件，大多採取排斥或迴避的態度。所幸在本法施行後，總算是認可了本條例之立法精神。然而，未來在附隨組織認定上，法院的態度仍待繼續觀察。無論如何，在本條例施行後，法院總算開始正視轉型正義法學根本性問題。

關鍵字

轉型正義 ； 不當黨產 ； 威權統治 ； 政黨公平競爭

並列摘要

On July 25, 2016, the Legislative Yuan passed the third reading of “The Statute of Political Parties and Their Accompanying Organizations Improperly Obtained Property”, which is the first important Act to Taiwan's transitional justice, a symbol of Taiwan's first step toward transitional justice.
The staged democratization in our country has led to the failure of our nation thoroughly implementing Transitional Justice. Looking back and examining the authoritarian regime of the past, the Kuomintang of China has used their status as the majority party in the parliament to continuously obstruct the adoption of this Ordinance, rendering the deferral of legislation for sixteen years, which is harmful both to the transition of its party and to the fairness of domestic party politics.
This Ordinance generally inherits the Party Asset Bill of the Executive Yuan version between 2002 and 2005. Although known as a thorough interpretation of German law, there are significant differences in the background legislation between Germany and our country, thus it is impossible to fully implement all terms of their legislative policies. However, with respect to the purpose of regulation and the logic of legislation, both of them are the same. Taking a comprehensive view of the entire regulations, the failure to strictly observe the divide between nations and parties, where ill-gotten Party Assets are obtained by means of violating the principle of law, has long been criticized by all walks of life. However, requesting the return of such properties from political parties according to existing laws and regulations will be difficult due to time-lapse, time constraints, or other factors. Moreover, since the properties improperly acquired by the political parties have their own special political background, which is difficult to pursue by laws, these matters can only be decided through special legislative means to repay the public. This is required in order to establish a fair and reasonable competition mechanism for political parties as well as to ensure the financial transparency of political parties, so as to enhance the development of our constitutional democracy.
The main effect after the implementation of this Ordinance has two major aspects. First, the impact on the political party rule of law. Under the expectation that there will be no assistance for the party's production in the future, the China Kuomintang has begun to actively carry out the transformation to enhance its operational efficiency and return to thinking on the basis of public opinion as well as a return to policy and agenda orientation. It intends to win the support of the people based on political ideas, and to rely on political contributions with a public opinion basis to participate in the elections, so as to achieve the legislative purpose of establishing "a fair competition environment for political parties" under the present Ordinance. The second one is the impact on our national judiciary. In the past, the courts were relatively conservative in handling the issue of transitional justice, and most jurisdictions in our country, in the absence of complete denial of the legitimacy of authoritarian rule during the martial law, tended to exclude or avoid cases related to transitional justice. Fortunately, the enactment of this Act has finally recognized the legislative spirit of this Ordinance. However, regarding the accreditation of accompanying organizations, the attitude of the court remains to be observed. In any case, after the implementation of this Act, the courts finally began to address the fundamental issue of the law of transitional justice.

並列關鍵字

Transitional justice ； ill-gotten Party Assets ； authoritarian rule ； fair competition among political parties

參考文獻

黃若羚（2007）。《轉型正義與法院之功能角色》。臺北：國立臺灣大學法律學研究所，碩士論文。

鄒智純（2011）。《我國再生能源發展條例立法過程與法案內容之研究》。臺北： 國立台灣大學社會科學院政治學系，碩士論文。

王泰升（2000）。〈中國國民黨的接收「日產」為「黨產」〉，《律師雜誌》245： 105-111。

黃雅鈴（2001）。《國民黨不當黨產個案研究-以國發院土地為例》。臺北：國立臺北教育大學人文藝術學院台灣文化研究所，碩士論文。

黃兆年（2008）。《轉型正義與在台灣政經發展中的角色定位》。臺北：國立台灣大學社會科學院政治學系，碩士論文。