| dc.contributor | 法學院 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | 陳靜慧 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | Chen, Ching-hui | |
| dc.date (日期) | 2013-04 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 4-Jul-2022 13:01:06 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 4-Jul-2022 13:01:06 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 4-Jul-2022 13:01:06 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/140778 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 立法者為進行改革，制定僅於一定期間內有效的法規範，藉由施行此等法規範系統性地蒐集經驗，驗證檢討試行制度的利弊與成效，以決定是否建構全面適用之一般法規範，這種規範制定活動稱為「試驗性立法」。試驗性立法是立法者在立法過程中面臨無法預測是否能承受改革所致風險的問題時，得採取的一種立法技術。我國憲法未明文提及試驗性立法的概念，以試驗性立法的方式作為決定是否建構一體適用法規範的前行階段，其在憲法上之容許性，以及試驗性立法必須受哪些憲法原則的拘束，其適用之審查標準與密度與一般法規範之異同，在我國學理上的討論尚屬匱乏。本文以德國學說與實務對試驗性立法的相關論述為基礎，介紹試驗性立法的概念、特徵及其在法秩序中的定位，並討論試驗性立法之容許性與容許之理論基礎，以及制定時不能逾越的憲法界限（主要由比例原則與平等原則導出），再運用前開研究結果，以性質屬於試驗性立法的人民觀審試行條例草案為例，檢討採用試驗性立法的方式推行觀審制度與草案重要內容之合憲性。 | |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | The activity in which legislators make a new law in force only for a limited period of time to see how well it works, in order to collect experience systematically through the implementation of this law and then to decide whether or not to bring the law created originally for a test run into effect permanent, is called “experimental legislation”. Experimental legislation functions as a legislative technique, which legislators may use when they face problems with risk assessment for reforms. Taiwan’s constitution doesn’t refer to the concept of experimental legislation. This raises a number of questions that should be clarified: whether experimental legislation is an allowable means under constitution to arrive at a reliable solution, what constitutional principles must be obeyed at it, as well as what standards of scrutiny will be applied to review the constitutionality of an experimental legislation. By studying German literary theory and its practice, this paper introduces the concept and characteristics of experimental legislation, examines constitutional admissibility of experimental legislation and explores constitutional boundaries, marked out mainly by the principle of proportionality and equality, which lawmakers must not overstep in the case of experimental legislation. The article will then take the draft observer jury system Bill as an example of experimental legislation, review based on the above research findings whether or not it is constitutional to move toward citizen participation in Taiwan’s justice system by a test run of a proposed observer jury system on the basis of a provisional act and consider the constitutionality of the main points of the proposed draft bill. | |
| dc.format.extent | 130 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | text/html | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 法學叢刊, Vol.58, No.2, pp.111-131 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 試驗性立法; 風險預測; 比例原則; 平等原則; 人民觀審制 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Experimental legislation; Risk assessment; The principle of proportionality; Equality; Observer jury system | |
| dc.title (題名) | 試驗性立法的憲法界限 --以人民觀審試行條例草案為例 | |
| dc.title (題名) | The Constitutional Boundaries of Experimental Legislation--A Case Study of “Observer Jury System” Pilot Program | |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | |
