本文主要研究以都市更新條例規範上之程序保障為出發點,並以大法官釋字第709號解釋為中心評析作為探討主軸,由於都市更新之辦理具有複雜之權利義務關係,依其整體性質觀之,乃涉及憲法保障之財產權與居住自由等基本權利,因此本文從司法院大法官釋字第709號解釋為中心作為探討架構,進而論述程序保障對於都市更新條例之修正,最後針對草案有所建議及評析。 都市更新條例為發展國家經濟、促進土地開發、美化都市景觀、維護並保障人民居住環境所作之制度設計,由於都市更新之辦理具有複雜之權利義務關係,依其整體性質觀之,乃涉及憲法保障之財產權與居住自由等基本權利,究而因其私益性質之擴張,而致使公益性有所退縮,在整體法規上,有鑑於審議組織、同意比例、程序保障有所不足,為制度上程序保障之探究,爰以大法官釋字第709號為中心,探討違憲條文,並針對制度上程序面之不足予以探討及建議。
This study mainly discusses procedural safeguards stated in Urban Renewal Act based on J.Y. Interpretation No. 709. The urban renewal process is complex and involves various rights and obligations, including constitutionally-guaranteed property rights and freedom of residence. Thus, the overall nature of the act and Judicial Yuan Interpretation Number 709 was used in this paper as case study of how procedural safeguards can be applied to amending the Urban Renewal Act. Finally, this study provides recommendations and assessments on amendment drafts. The Urban Renewal Act contains measures designed for national economic development, the promotion of land development, beautification of urban landscapes, and the maintenance and protection of people's living environment. Urban renewal involves complex rights and obligations, including fundamental rights of property, and the constitutional guarantee of freedom of residence. Therefore, the Act's overall nature is used to explore whether the expansion of private interests has been detrimental to public welfare. Judicial Yuan Interpretation Number 709 is used as a basis to discuss unconstitutional provisions, the overall law, organizational reviews, agreement ratios, deficiencies in procedural safeguards, and the exploration of procedural safeguard measures. This study also investigates procedural deficiencies and makes recommendations.
為了持續優化網站功能與使用者體驗,本網站將Cookies分析技術用於網站營運、分析和個人化服務之目的。
若您繼續瀏覽本網站,即表示您同意本網站使用Cookies。