似法非法: 論菸草控制框架公約於臺灣之法律效力與事實效力

本論文研究《菸草控制框架公約》於臺灣之法律實踐。分別自法律體系之內部觀點（法釋義學）與外部觀點（法學與跨學門研究），探究《菸草控制框架公約》於臺灣之國內法效力，以及《菸草控制框架公約》對於臺灣法律實踐產生之影響與反應出的制度困難。法釋義學的觀點，幫助本文確立《菸草控制框架公約》於臺灣之法律定性。《菸草控制框架公約》經國會審議通過，並由總統頒發加入書，亦影響《菸害防制法》之修正。然而，《菸草控制框架公約》並未經總統公布，亦未制定施行法，其國內法效力於實務上履生疑義。本文整理實務上對於《菸草控制框架公約》國內法效力之質疑，並檢驗這些主張是否有理由。法學與跨學門研究的觀點，則將法律體系作為觀察對象，借助法律與社會科學之理論—包括：遵循理論、跨國法律理論、管制理論—描繪《菸草控制框架公約》對於臺灣法律實踐的影響。隨著科技之發展，菸品的種類日新月異，產生了新的管制需求與管制困難。《菸草控制框架公約》透過每兩年一次的締約方大會，結合全球的力量，緊追菸品發展的腳步，不斷作成新的決議回應管制需求。相對於此，臺灣自2009年最後一次修正公布《菸害防制法》後，已逾十年未為修正。在這其間，菸品市場快速發展，電子煙、加熱式菸品、非法菸品貿易等等的菸草控制議題層出不窮。雖然實務對於《菸草控制框架公約》國內法效力迭有爭論，但是立法、司法、與行政機關在近十餘年來，仍不乏有在修法草案、立法理由、判決、函釋等，提及《菸草控制框架公約》之情況。也有許多法律實務嘗試在《菸害防制法》等菸草控制國內法規範不足的艱困情況下，借助《菸草控制框架公約》回應新興菸品等管制議題。藉由這些實務文件中，可以觀察出立法、司法、與行政之互動。最後，本文依據研究臺灣《FCTC》法律實務之經驗，融會前述的不同理論，嘗試提出一個以臺灣經驗出發的法學研究理論框架。

關鍵字

菸草控制框架公約；內國法化；遵循理論；跨國法律理論；管制理論；菸害防制法

並列摘要

This Thesis focuses on Taiwan’s legal practice of Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) from two perspectives: one is from the interior of the legal system (doctrinalism) and the other is from the exterior of the legal system (legal-sociology). From the doctrinal perspective, this Thesis examines FCTC’s legal nature in Taiwan. Congress passed FCTC, and the President executed FCTC’s Instrument of Accession. After then, in the spirit of FCTC, Tobacco Hazard Prevention Act was revised in 2009. However, FCTC has not been promulgated by the President, neither any act to implement FCTC adopted. Therefore, in practice, there is a debate about whether FCTC per se is domestic law in Taiwan. This Thesis reviews the opposite arguments and examines whether these arguments are sound. From the legal-sociological perspective, Taiwan’s legal practice is observed by 3 theories, i.e. compliance theory, transnational legal theory, and regulatory theory. Through these theories, this Thesis portrays FCTC’s development and transformation in Taiwan. Regulatory demands and difficulties on tobacco control increase with innovations of tobacco products and developments of technology. By Conference of the Parties held every two years, FCTC makes decisions continuously to respond to regulatory urgencies. On the contrary, Taiwan has not revised Tobacco Hazard Prevention Act since 2009, although there have been many tobacco control issues popping out in the last 10 years, inter alia, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and illicit trade in tobacco products. Despite the debate about whether FCTC is domestic law, the government—including legislative, judicial, and executive—has mentioned FCTC still in a number of amendments, judgments, and other administrative practices. Some of these practices attempt to respond to regulatory difficulties, albeit relevant domestic regulations are lacking. Interactions amongst legislative, judicial, and executive agencies are observed via these legal practices.