法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 大法官規範審查程序中「擴張審理標的」之研究-以「重要關聯性」的探究為中心(A Study on the "extended judicial review" in the Grand Justice Regulatory Disposition Procedure - Focusing on the "Significant Nexus Test")
編著譯者: 吳信華
出版日期: 2013.04
刊登出處: 台灣/東吳法律學報第 24 卷 第 4 期 /1-63 頁
頁  數: 63 點閱次數: 4673
下載點數: 252 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 東吳大學 授權者指定不分配權利金給作者)
關 鍵 詞: 大法官憲法訴訟人民聲請釋憲重要關聯性實質援用訴外裁判
中文摘要: 在大法官釋憲案件的程序中,本質上對各種聲請案件的處理當應以法條所定訴訟類型及其要件為依循,方能判斷上可否對該標的予以受理、或其審理之範圍如何。然於釋憲實務的運作中,大法官不乏有對聲請之標的及範圍為「擴張審理」者,即對原本不合於釋憲要件者加以審理。大法官就此使用的理由主要為「重要關聯性」或「實質援用」,然實務上對其內涵均未有所明確闡釋,且適用情狀亦不一致。就此即衍生諸多爭議問題,而均具有理論與實務上的重要性。
本文即以大法官的「擴張審理」為研究主題,而復以實務上最常使用的「重要關聯性」為主軸而開展,在歸納實務見解並精確考證此一用語於吾國學理與實務之使用情狀後,即以憲法訴訟之理論為基礎而思考論證,認為「重要關聯性」等概念並不是一個可以為「擴張審理」而演繹運用的法則,問題的核心毋寧應在於必須精確釐清各種訴訟類型中的程序要件:如以「人民聲請釋憲」而言,即係「確定終局裁判『所適用』之法令」;在「法官聲請釋憲」中即係「裁判上重要關聯性」此一要件的界定。在對此為合理說明後並思考「實質援用」的相關問題,且一併探究大法官「擴張審理」與「訴外裁判」(「聲請外解釋」)的關聯性,復就所提理論印證檢視實務上相關解釋,最後並為本文的結論與具體建議。
英文關鍵詞: Grand JusticeConstitutional litigationjudicial review brought by a citizen (citizens' petitions for a constitutional interpretation)significant nexus testactual invocationjudgment beyond the compass of justiciability (judicial interpretation beyond the contexts of the petition)
英文摘要: The procedure of judicial interpretation by the Grand Justice, in essence, should be carried out to review all kinds of cases on the types and elements of legal litigation before deciding whether to accept the claim and the scope of the petition. However, in the current practice of the Judicial Interpretation, the Grand Justice sometimes extend the judicial review beyond the claim and scope, which is against the rules of constitutional interpretation. To justify such practice, the Grand Justice has based their reasoning on the grounds of "substantially related" and "substantially cited and invoked". However, these created concepts are not explicitly interpreted and have been inconsistently applied. Therefore, many controversies in theory and practice are generated, such as the connotations of such concepts and the justification of the Grand Justice to conduct the extended judicial review.
The research theme of this article is thus the "extended review" of the Grand Justice, focusing on the most commonly used justification for the practice -- "substantially related". After a thorough literature review on related theories and practice, arguments and analyses of this article are based on theories of constitutional litigation. It leads to the finding that "substantially related" and similar concepts are not appropriate criteria for conducting a "extended judicial review". Instead, The core issue shall be to accurately clarify the procedural elements of various petitions for a Judicial Interpretation. For instance, in the case of "citizens' petitions for a constitutional interpretation", it is essential to identify the involved "law and order applied by the final and binding judgment". On the other hand, the "judges'petitions for a constitutional interpretation" required for a clear definition of what is "substantially related to judgment". After elaborating the concerned issues, this article probes relevant aspects of "substantially cited and invoked" as well as examines the relevance between "extended judicial review" and "judicial interpretation beyond the contexts of petition" in the constitutional interpretation procedure. The theoretical perspectives proposed earlier are then invoked to examine the concerned Grand Justice Interpretations, followed by concluding remarks and concrete recommendations of the author.
目  次: 壹、問題之提出
一、釋憲實務上「擴張審理標的」的運作現況
二、本文研究範圍與對象的界定
貳、釋憲實務中「擴張審理」問題的詳析與探究
一、實務解釋不同階段的態樣呈現
(一)「擴張審理」的濫觴—釋四四五
(二)「重要關聯性」的具體適用
擴張「(所)適用」概念的「實質援用」
二、實務見解的歸納與問題延伸
(一)實務解釋的脈絡思考—「目的取向」的問題解決方法?
(二)問題的延伸--「擴張審理」不同原因的基礎性思考
參、「重要關聯性」內涵的釐清與再思考
一、「重要關聯性」概念的溯源考證
(一)釋四四五的源起與發展
(二)釋憲實務中相關不同意見書的進階使用與論述
二、「重要關聯性」概念的釐清
(一)相關德國學理的比較說明
(二)「重要關聯(性)」使用不同情狀的基礎說明
肆、「重要關聯性」作為大法官「擴張審理」的探究與闡釋
一、問題之基礎—不同「訴訟類型」差異性思考的重要性
二、問題的核心-「人民聲請釋憲」中「確定終局裁判」『所適用』之法令」之觀察
三、「所適用」概念的界定與範圍
四、「所適用」的補充界定-「合理關聯性」的輔助思考
五、其他訴訟類型中「重要關聯性」的運用及情狀之闡釋
(一)「法官聲請釋憲」-「裁判上重要關聯性」的再界定
(二)「機關及三分之一立法委員聲請法令違憲」-「職權上所適用法令」
「地方自治法規違憲」的聲請
伍、「擴張審理標的」問題的延伸與實務見解的再檢視
一、「擴張審理」不同理由的思辨
(一)「實質援用」作為擴張審理之事由與「重要關聯性」
(二)「客觀秩序的維護」作為大法官擴張審理之事由?
(三)「擴張審理」與「訴外裁判」
二、相關實務見解的再檢視
(一)「人民聲請釋憲」程序中「所適用」的合理界定
(二)「法官聲請釋憲」程序中「裁判上重要關聯性」的判斷
(三)基於「客觀目的」而擴張審理者
(四)「實質援用」的再思考
(五)重要關聯性」過度擴張之例證
(六)小結
陸、結論與建議
一、本文結論
二、具體建議
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
    返回功能列