台湾地区“公民投票”的司法审查——以“ECFA公民投票”诉讼为例  

Judicial Review of “Referendum”in Taiwan:A Case Study on the ECFA “Referendum”Lawsuit

作　　者：季烨 Ji Ye

机构地区：[1]两岸关系和平发展协同创新中心,福建厦门361005 [2]厦门大学台湾研究中心,福建厦门361005

出　　处：《台湾研究集刊》2017年第6期58-65,共8页Taiwan Research Journal

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目"新形势下维护两岸关系和平发展的法治路径研究"(17JJGAT001)

摘　　要：以民进党和"台联党"为主要推手的政治力量四度要求将《海峡两岸经济合作框架协议》(ECFA)诉诸"公民投票",全景式展示了台湾地区"公民投票法"的运作机制。"ECFA公民投票"引发的系列诉讼,厘清了审议会在提案审查权限、审查标准和审查程序方面的疑义,首次在司法层面确立了"公民投票"的规范空间及其限度。司法机关对正当程序的"苛求",与其在审查实体问题时的宽松乃至放纵形成鲜明对比。这种"轻实体,重程序"的审查方法,固然体现了司法者的政治智慧,看似赋予审议会过滤不适格"公民投票"的功能,但实质上放弃了司法机关认定"公民投票"合法性的"安全阀"。The Democratic Progressive Party （DPP） and Taiwan Solidarity Union （ TSU）, the main promoter of the political power, have four times required that as to ECFA they should resort to referendum, which panoramically displays the operating mechanism of ＂referendum law＂ in Taiwan. The series of lawsuits triggered by the ECFA referendum have clarified the doubtful points in the proposal review authority, review standards and procedures in the Referendum Review Commission （RRC） , and for the first time, established the ＂referendum＂ standard space and its limitation. On the other hand, the judicial authority＇s harsh requirement on the due process from RRC offers a sharp contrast with its loose and even indulgent stance on the review of the substantive issues. Admittedly, such method adopted by the RRC embodies the political wisdom of the judicial authority, and may seemingly help RRC to filter the unqualified referendum proposals. On contrary, it has essentially abandoned the ＂safety valve＂ of the ＂referendum＂ legitimacy identified by the judicial authority.

关 键 词：两岸经济合作框架协议 “公民投票” 两岸协议 司法审查 

分 类 号：D927.58[政治法律—法学]