透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.143.168.172
  • 學位論文

德國威瑪共和半總統制憲法的設計、運作與轉出

The Design, Operation, and Exit of the Semi-Presidential Constitution of the German Weimar Republic

指導教授 : 吳玉山
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


半總統制研究是當代憲政研究中的重要子題。在這個子題中,威瑪共和是相當重要的早期個案。當我們進一步比較威瑪憲法和其他半總統制國家的憲法時可以發現,威瑪和這些國家在憲法的理論上仍舊存在差異。本論文分為三個部分對威瑪的半總統制作討論。首先,本論文將回答在何種情況下,威瑪共和會設計出一部具有半總統制色彩的憲法?而威瑪憲法在理論上和其他的半總統制憲法有何異同?其次,是什麼原因造成威瑪的半總統制相當不穩定的憲政運作?以及第三,威瑪的半總統制是在何種情況下發生憲政轉型,甚至最後造成民主崩潰?透過對威瑪的討論,本論文希望能夠豐富對半總統制的相關研究,尤其是對採用半總統制新憲法的興民主國家有所啟發。

並列摘要


In the research on semi-presidentialism, the Weimar Republic is always deemed an important historical case. However, when we compare the essence narrowly, we can find some differences between the Weimar Constitution and many other semi-presidential constitutions, especially those Eastern and Central Europe as well as the French Fifth Republic (the typical semi-presidential regime). Therefore, Weimar’s experience is worth to be discussed for the many newer semi-presidential democracies. In this desseration I will discuss the Weimar Republic in three parts. First, why and how the Weimar Republic has designed a semi-presidential constitution? What was the different about the constitutional essence betweenWeimar Republic and other semi-presidential regimes? Second, what were the conditions which, provided by the semi-presidential constitution, have made the Weimar Republic so unstable? And thirdly, in which way the semi-presidential constitution of the Weimar Republic has caused or contributed to its collapse? By this I hope to enrich the constitutional studies and to examine how institutional features can, in combination with other factors, stabilize or destabilize a new democracy, or what caused a transformation of the semi-presidential constitution.

參考文獻


王文霞,1980,〈威瑪共和失敗之探討:由經濟發展談起〉,《成功大學歷史學系歷史學報》,7: 221-252。
Wu, Yu-Shan. 2005. “Appointing the Prime Minister under Incongruence.” Taiwan Journal Democracy 1(1): 103-132.
沈有忠,2004,〈半總統制下的權力集散與政府穩定:台灣與威瑪共和的比較〉,《台灣民主季刊》,1(3): 99-130。
蔡宗珍,2003,〈卡爾史密特之憲法概念析論〉,《政治與社會哲學評論》,5: 75-122。
林繼文,2003,〈憲法作為一種制度〉,《政治與社會哲學評論》,5: 35-74。

延伸閱讀