| 關 鍵 詞： |
憲法法院；三人小組；憲法訴願；效能原則 |
| 中文摘要： |
2008 年憲法訴訟法草案相關規定，主要重點多在於審理組織法庭化、程序訴訟化以及各種釋憲類型與聲請要件的完備等，但對於為數最多的人民聲請解釋的類型，在聲請要件、審理組織與程序上並未有太多的變動。就此而言，本草案對於聲請案件減輕負擔的議題，相較於德國聯邦憲法法院法（以下簡稱憲法法院法）針對憲法訴願制度所帶來沉重負擔所提出之諸多規範，例如一般登記簿制度（Allgemeinen Register）、受理程序（Annahmeverfahren，德國聯邦憲法法院法第 93 條之 1 以下）、各庭與 3 人小組（Senat und Kammer）、簡易程序（憲法法院法第 24 條）及濫訴費用（Missbrauchsgebühr，憲法法院法第 34 條第 2 項）等程序或組織規範，本草案似乎未及考慮。著眼於此，本文旨在藉由檢視本草案關於「人民聲請憲法解釋（裁判）」制度之審理組織與審理程序，以及學理上所提出相關減輕裁判負擔的各種可能選項，並借鏡德國聯邦憲法法院法對此困境之解決途徑及其學理論述，藉此檢討並試圖提出減輕案件負擔的可能方法與選項。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
Constitutional Court；Chamber；Constitutional Complaint；Principle of Efficiency |
| 英文摘要： |
The draft of the Constitutional Procedure Act of 2008 mostly focuses on the changes on the organization of the Grand Justice to a constitutional court, the procedure of the judicial review to a form of litigation, and the completion of the regulations on different types of the judicial review and the application requirements. Nevertheless, as to the application filed by people which is the most in number, there are few changes in the regulations concerning the application requirements, the organization of the court and the reviewing procedure. In this case, comparing to the procedural or organizational regulations aiming to reduce the heavy caseload brought by the institution of the constitutional complaint in the Law on the Federal Constitutional Court in Germany such as the rules in relation to the general register, the hearing for the determination of the judicability of the cases (Article 93-1 and below), the senate andthe chamber, the summary procedure (Article 24), and the fee for abusing of office (Paragraph 2 of Article 34 ), it seems that the draft is in lack of consideration. Therefore, in this article, the author intends to purpose and analyze the possible methods and alternatives to reduce the caseload through reviewing the regulations relating to the organization and procedure of the court in handling the cases filed by people in the draft, analyzing the other alternatives raised by scholars to reduce caseload, and referring to the resolving methods employed by the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany and the theories proposed by their scholars.
|
| 目 次： |
壹、緣起
貳、人民聲請解釋憲法之制度功能及補充性原則
一、人民聲請解釋憲法之制度功能
二、補充性原則
參、我國現行憲法裁判組織與程序之檢視與德國憲法法院法之借鏡
一、我國現行憲法裁判案件的審理組織與程序
二、德國聯邦憲法法院法相關組織與程序規範－以憲法訴願為中心
（一）孿生法院與 3 人小組之組織建制
（二）3 人小組之組織與地位
（三）3 人小組之裁判權限
（四）3 人小組之於庭的輔助、從屬與減輕負擔功能，以及受理程序的整體評價
（五）減輕負擔的其他手段
肆、我國憲法訴訟法修正草案評析
一、有效權利救濟與釋憲制度的功能實踐作為釋憲制度的基本要求
二、分庭與 3 人小組之組織設計
三、人民聲請裁判受理程序的再檢視
四、減輕負擔的其他手段
五、移審制度的引進討論
六、分案制度
伍、結論
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|