法學期刊
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 論台灣的轉型正義:過去、現在與未來之間的對話(Transitional Justice in Taiwan: A Dialogue among the Past, the Present and the Future)
編著譯者: 王泰升
出版日期: 2017.03.14
刊登出處: 台灣/台灣法學雜誌第 315 期 /1-24 頁
頁  數: 24 點閱次數: 2513
下載點數: 96 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 王泰升
關 鍵 詞: 轉型正義法治真相調查賠償黨產
中文摘要: 就國際上有關轉型正義的理論,在此欲從台灣的歷史及社會脈絡,論其應有的內涵。台灣於 1990 年代初民主轉型,後,不像許多國家般進行轉型正義,但大法官已指出威權國家確有「過去非法」的行為。2000 年第一次政黨輪替後,新的執政圑隊未掌握立法權,故不能以立法追究「過去合法但現在不正當」的行為,僅大法官有時以正義觀已轉變,而否定過去危害人權之法律或憲法解釋之效力。 2008 年威權時代執政黨重拾行政立法兩權,更不能期待其以立法否定威權國家形式上合法的行為。迨 2016 年再次政黨輪替,新興政治勢力在立法院過半,須透過立法方能實現的轉型正義才得到落實機會,例如不當黨產之處理已完成立法。
轉型正義的概念承認過去存有與現在不同的法律正義觀,但過去的行為縱令基於當時正義觀而形式上合法,只要現在基於當今的正義觀認為不正當,仍可予以非難,以追求實質的法治,並採取必要的彌平措施,顯示未來將繼續擁護當今的正義觀。因此宜藉由國家及政黨的檔案進行真相調查,辨別不正義行為之態樣係屬「過去非法」、或「過去合法但現在不正當」。前者原則上依法治原則處理,只需基於轉型正義之理念,排除如時效等阻礙當今究責之障礙;後者則須以得溯及既往的立法行動,做成符合當今正義觀的處置。對參與「過去非法」的官員固然可予以究責,亦可適度選擇原諒;而對執行「過去合法但現在不正當」的官員,則只論其道德上責任,除非是當時可決定法律內容的首惡份子。在基於轉型正義而以立法彌補受害者的損失時,宜以配套尋求當下最妥當的方式。轉型正義的最終目標是:促進和解並以法治防止再犯。
英文關鍵詞: transitional justicerule of lawto investigate the truthcompensationparty assets
英文摘要: With regard to transitional justice theory in the international community, this article wants to discuss its contents according to historical and social background of Taiwan. Unlike other countries, Taiwan was not engaged in carrying out transitional justice after her democratic transformation in the early 1990s. However, during the same period, the Grand Justices of Taiwan had held that authoritarian state had illegal actions in the past. In 2000, the ruling party in the administrative branch changed, but this party ( DPP ) did not become the majority in Taiwan’s parliament; as a result, it was unable to promote transitional justice by legislation. After 2008, the KMT controlled administrative and legislative branches as it did during the authoritarian rule period, and therefore it was impossible for the government of Taiwan to advocate transitional justice, which would criticize the KMT for its misrule in the past. Nevertheless, the DPP won the presidential election and became the majority in the parliament in 2016. The idea of transitional justice was thus prevailing at this time. The legislation of dealing with improper assets of the KMT was obviously a product of transitional justice.
The theory of transitional justice admits that the concept of justice in the past is different from that in the present, but further advocates substantial, rather than formal, rule of law that legal behaviors in the past should be blamed if they become unjust according to today’s concept of justice, and victims have right to seek redress for those wrong behaviors. The purpose of transitional justice is to confirm that today’s concept of justice will be followed in the future. Accordingly, it is necessary to investigate the truth by the archives of the state and the KMT so as to tell two kinds of past wrong behaviors: “the illegal in the past" and "the legal in form but unfair from today’s viewpoint.” The former can be dealt with by the principle of rule of law, with the aid of excluding the duration of excising legal rights. The latter must be invalidated by statutes for respecting the principle of transitional justice. Officials should be appropriately blamed for their illegal behaviors in the past. In contrast, those who did their jobs in accordance with unfair laws in the past should take moral, not legal, responsibility. The remedy or compensation for wrongs in the past is sometimes limited in consideration of the fact that given order has existed for a long time. The ultimate goal of transitional justice is to reach compromise and to avoid the same wrong in the future by democratic rule of law.
目  次: 壹、從台灣經驗出發的轉型正義理論
一、轉型正義的概念
二、民主轉型但轉型正義不彰
三、政治新局下轉型正義的啟動
貳、依真相調查辨別不正義行為之樣態
一、過去合法批示死刑但於今應譴責
二、過去的非法審判自始應受譴責
三、審視國家及政黨的檔案以探求真相
參、追究威權統治當局「應轉型而未轉型」之責
一、國民黨政府特有的以黨治國及國家資助政黨
二、追究過去非法或現在不正當的黨產
三、追究威權政府官員之責任
肆、彌補受害者的損失
一、過去國家法律對原住民族的壓迫
二、過去國家法律對個人的壓迫
伍、促進和解並以法治防止再犯
一、以「歷史認識」的轉型進和解
二、以民主的法治體制鞏固轉型後的正義
陸、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
    返回功能列