通識教育之比較憲法案例研究－以人性尊嚴爲中心

A Comparative Case Study Approach to Constitution Study in the General Education System-a Human Dignity-centered methodology

李麒(Chi Lee) ； 侯沂淳(Yi-Chun Hou)

《通識研究集刊》 15期 (2009/06) Pp. 133-160

https://doi.org/10.6488/JCGE.200906.0133

摘要

通識教育中安排大學一年級生選修憲法課程，主要目的在培養國民守法精神。比較憲法案例教學突破傳統教課書之授課方式，每週以不同主題為課程核心，以案例討論方式提高學生對憲法課程之興趣，並增加該課程之廣度與深度。案例研究方法屬於憲法課程新的教學模式。
本文以「人性尊嚴」案例教學為中心，比較美國、日本、韓國及德國之最高法院判決，針對死刑、無期徒刑等相關議題加以比較分析，作為我國現行法制之參考，結論部分就比較憲法之研究方法則以「本土化」思維為中心，引進外國制度必須考量是否符合本國曆史、文化與風俗，以免發生「曲高和寡」或「水土不服」之現象。

關鍵字

通識教育 ； 比較憲法 ； 死刑 ； 無期徒刑 ； 最高法院 ； 本土化

並列摘要

In Taiwan's General Education system, freshman college students are offered an elective course in Constitution study, the main purpose of which is to educate citizens to appreciate, understand and abide by the spirit of the law. The use of case studies in a comparative approach to Constitution studies breaks through typical text-based learning. Students are introduced to a different central topic every week. Guided discussion of case studies raises college student interest in Constitution study, and broadens and deepens the course perspective. The discussion and interrogation of case studies in Constitution study represents a new education methodology.
This paper approaches case studies from a 'Human Dignity' perspective. It examines and comparatively analyzes decisions reached by the Supreme Courts of the United States, Japan, Korea and Germany on issues such as the death penalty and life imprisonment. It encourages comparison and reflection on current debates on the legal system in Taiwan and concludes with an understanding of the central role of 'Nativism' in any research comparing different Constitutions. In contemplating the importation and institution of any foreign legal system, due consideration must be given to its appropriateness in terms of historical, cultural and traditional background. Failure to do so may result in attempts to transplant a legal system that lacks context and does not suit the specific needs of the country.

並列關鍵字

General Education ； Comparative Constitution ； Death Penalty ； Life imprisonmemt ； Supreme Court ； Nativism