台灣地區「分立政府」與「一致政府」之研究－立法機關與行政機關在立法過程中的影響力：一致政府與分立政府的比較（II）

Abstract

本研究的主要目的在於比較在一致政府與分立政府時期，立法機關與行政機關在立法過程中的相對影響力。本研究以第四屆與第五屆立法院為研究焦點，研究時間點自一九九九年二月至二 OO 三年七月底止，研究時間可依不同的政府組成分成三個時段，第一時段是第四屆立法院的前半期（自一九九九年二月至二 OOO 年五月），此乃由國民黨掌握行政機關與立法機關的一致政府時期，第二時段是第四屆立法院的後半期（自二 OOO 年五月至二 OO 二年一月），此乃由民進黨掌行政機關，國民黨掌立法機關的分立政府時期，至於第三時段乃是第五屆立法院的前半期（自二 OO 二年二月至二 OO 三年七月），此時民進黨掌控行政機關，且成為立法院的最大政黨，但是僅掌握不到四成 (38.7%)的立法院議席，而相對的國民黨的席次大幅滑落，成為立法院的第二大黨（議席佔 30.2%），此時段是為民進黨少數政府時期。本研究以研究時段內立法院所有的法律提案為分析的對象。研究發現顯示：第一，行政院在立法過程中扮演相當重要的角色，但是在不同的政府時期有所不同，在一致政府時期，行政院的提案比立法委員的提案被通過的比例較高，且通過所需要的時間也較短；至於在分立政府時期，行政院的提案被通過的比例大幅降低，且通過所需要的時間也較立委提案所需的時間為長。此顯示當掌握行政院的政黨無法掌握立法院的多數席次時，在法案的推動上較為困難。其次，本研究亦發現國民黨與民進黨在一致政府與分立政府時期的朝野角色互換，導致其立委有不同的立法表現。在一致政府時期，民進黨立委在立法上較為積極，但是在分立政府時期，由於民進黨獲得行政權的舞台，因此民進黨立委在提案上並未如過去般積極。反之，在國民黨立委方面，在分立政府時期，由於失去行政權的舞台，較能表現的空間在立法院，因此在立法提案上較過去大為積極。

The purpose of this project is to examine the relative influence of legislative branch and executive branch in the process of lawmaking, under the different periods of time of unified and divided governments. This research focuses on the fourth term and the fifth term of the Legislative Yuan. The research period of time ranges from 1999 February to 2003 July, divided into three periods. The first is unified government, beginning from February 1999 to May 2000, in which the KMT dominates the executive and the legislative branches. The second is divided government, beginning from May 2000 to January 2002, in which the DPP dominates the executive branch and the KMT dominates the legislative branch. The third is the DPP minority 2002 to July 2003, in which the DPP dominates the executive branch and has been the largest party in the legislative branch, but with only 38.7 percent of seats. This research focuses on all legislation initiations in the Legislative Yuan. The research findings show: First, the executive branch plays an important role in the process of lawmaking. However, the influence of the executive branch is quite different in the unified and divided governments. The initiation of the executive branch can be passed much easier and faster in the unified government than in the divided government. This finding shows that if the party of the executive branch cannot get a majority of seats in the legislative branch, it is difficult for it to lead in the policy-making process. Secondly, The KMT and DPP legislators play quite different roles in the legislative process in different periods of time. During the period of unified government, the DPP legislators are much more aggressive in the legislative process. However, the DPP legislators have been much more inactive in the legislative process since the DPP got the executive power. On the contrary, the KMT legislators have been much more aggressive in the legislative process during the period of divided government since the KMT lost the executive power.