半總統制的崩潰、延續與轉型：威瑪共和與芬蘭的憲政比較

Abstract

要受到越來越多新興民主國家制訂半總統制憲法的影響，對於半總統制的相關研究也越來越受到重視。依照學界對半總統制的定義，威瑪共和與芬蘭都在1919年設計出符合半總統制內涵的憲法，可說是當代最早的兩個半總統制的個案。這兩個國家的憲政運作卻有完全相反的結果：威瑪在1933年崩潰，而芬蘭先是渡過經濟危機，更在80年代逐漸往議會制轉型。本文擬就制度與非制度因素的互動，討論這兩個個案運作的迥異結果。本文將從憲法理論做比較的出發點，分析兩種不同理論基礎的半總統制憲法，並討論這兩種半總統制憲法在危機社會的運作情況。在威瑪是民主崩潰，而芬蘭則是延續，並且在外部危機消退後逐步向議會制轉型。制度具有的根本差異，加上外在環境的因素，是造成兩個半總統制國家一個崩潰，一個穩定轉型的因素。許多新興民主國家設計半總統制憲法之後，開始追求制度化與民主穩定的目標，這兩個國家的歷史經驗當可以提供一些比較的經驗。

As democratization spread in Eastern and Central Europe over the last two decades, Semi-Presidentialism has become a concept with more attention paid when discussing constitutional issues. By definition, the Weimar Republic and Finland were two of the initial experiments of semipresidentialism. However, the constitutional practices in the Weimar Republic and Finland are worlds apart. Both semi-presidential, the Weimar Republic had broken down but Finland became a quasi-parliamentary democracy. This paper intends on discussing the differential essences of the semi-presidential constitutions. We will also compare the discrepancy between constitutional essence and practice of these two semi-presidential regimes. The different experiences of the Weimar Republic and Finland can inspire new Semi-Presidential democracies.