Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
|dc.description.abstract||我國由於第三波民主化浪潮及國內要求民主改革呼聲日益高漲的影響，在1987年7月15日，蔣經國宣佈解除戒嚴，隨後解除黨禁與報禁，終於結束了實行長達五十多年一黨獨大的威權體制，轉型為民主憲政體制國家；而我國在經歷了1996年第一次總統直選後，被美國「自由之家」同時被列入「選舉的民主」與「自由的民主」國家行列﹔因此，這次總統直選，不但是臺灣民主化的關鍵，也是民主政治最重要的里程碑。而2000年民進黨籍的陳水扁贏得總統大選，完成了第一次政黨輪替與政權的和平移轉後，臺灣人民所享有的政治權利更進一步提升，與日本並列為亞洲地區最自由的國家。隨後在2008年國民黨籍馬英九贏得總統選舉後，臺灣在短短的八年間順利完成了第二次的政黨輪替與政權和平轉移。按照Huntington所提出的「雙輪替測試(two-turnover test)」，（Huntington,1991：266-267）臺灣正式成為民主鞏固的國家。 我國以和平、穩定、漸進的方式完成民主轉型與民主鞏固，其成功經驗成為第三波民主化理論與模式所引用的典範之一。然而在民主轉型的過程當中，許多過去被刻意壓抑且未被妥善解決的問題逐漸的的浮現；這些問題就是威權體制時代執政者迫害人權與不正義作為。為了釐清真相，重建社會互信基礎，導正過去的不正義作為，因此政府必須進行轉型正義的施政。轉型正義主要有三大待處理的議題，即重建真相、追究責任與修正不當政策等。然而，相較於其他新興民主國家，我國的民主化程度與生活水準已達先進民主國家，但轉型正義問題的處理進度與成效卻遠遠落後許多仍身處開發中國家之林的其他新興民主國家，令人遺憾與不解。 根據研究者瞭解，臺灣在民主化以後，國民黨的李登輝執政了十多年，因國民黨與李登輝是威權體制的執行者，當然沒有動機去檢討與追究自己的錯誤和壓迫惡行，失去了轉型正義的黃金時機。民進黨陳水扁執政後又把轉型正義引入藍綠之爭的歧路，淪為民進黨的政治與選舉操弄工具。國民黨馬英九贏回政權後，雖努力化解受害家屬的不滿，但其推動轉型正義的進度也非常緩慢，家屬對其的不滿未曾稍歇。 因此，研究者將從我國兩次政黨輪替，（一）2000~2008年，陳水扁與民進黨執政時期；（二）2008~2016，馬英九與國民黨在執政時期，分別研究剖析兩個時期政治領袖與政黨針對轉型正義的施政作為、進度與面臨的困境及政治效應，最後總和與比較我國兩次政黨輪轉型正義的實踐，並得出我國轉型正義的模式。最後，進行整體回顧與分析，以為未來之政策制訂與推動，提供建議與參考。||zh_TW|
|dc.description.abstract||Under the international pressure of Third Wave Democracy and domestic calls for democratic reform, Chiang Ching-kuo announced to lift martial law on July 15, 1987 and then the ban on political parties and newspaper publications, officially ending the one-party dictatorship in the previous 50 years and ushering in the transition to a democratic constitutional system. After holding the first direct presidential election in 1996, Taiwan was listed by the US-base Freedom House among the countries that implement "democratic elections" and "democracy and freedom." Thus, the presidential election in 1996 was the most important milestone in Taiwan's democratization and democratic politics. In 2000, when Chen Shui-bian of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) won the presidential election, leading to Taiwan's first ruling party alternation and peaceful transfer of political power, the political rights enjoyed by the Taiwanese were further enhanced, and Taiwan was ranked as the most free country in Asia with an equal score with Japan (average index of 1.5). Then in 2008, Ma Ying-jeou of Kuomintang (KMT) won the presidential election, leading to the second ruling party alternation and peaceful transfer of political power in Taiwan in just eight years. Taiwan has since officially became a country with democratic consolidation, according to the "two-turnover test" proposed by Huntington (Huntington, 1991: 266-267). Taiwan’s successful experience in a peaceful, stable and gradual transition to democratic system and democratic consolidation has become one of the best examples cited for theories and models of the Third Wave Democracy. However, many problems that were deliberately suppressed in the process of democratic transition have gradually emerged, especially those human rights abuse and unjust cases during the era of authoritarian rulers. It is thus important for the government to implement transitional justice so as to clarify the truth, rebuild mutual trust for the societies, and rectify unjust acts in the past. Transitional justice is mainly concerned with three pending issues, namely reconstruction of the truth, accountability and correcting improper policies. Although Taiwan's democratization and standard of living have reached the levels of advanced democratic countries, its progress and effectiveness of transitional justice has lagged far behind many other emerging democracies. It is regrettable and puzzling. In my personal opinion, it is because Lee Teng-hui was an executor of the authoritarian regime, he had no incentive to review and explore the mistakes and unjust oppression committed by KMT. Thus, Lee had thus tried to refrain himself as much as possible from implementing the transitional justice programs during his administration and thus Taiwan lost a golden opportunity for transitional justice. During the 8-year administration of Chen Shui-bian, he manipulated the transitional justice process for DPP’s political and electoral advantages, thus leading to vicious power struggle between the pan-blue and pan-green camps. Then, Ma Ying-jeou won back the political power for KMT, but his implementation of transitional justice programs was also very slow and has not defused the discontent and grievances of victimized families. Therefore, the author makes a study on the two ruling party alternations in Taiwan, namely (1) Chen Shui-bian and DPP in power from 2000 to 2008, and (2) Ma Ying-jeou and KMT administration from 2008 to 2016. The author first makes an inventory of the transitional justice programs and mechanisms that Chen Shui-bian and Ma Ying-jeou have implemented, their progresses, their challenges, and the political effects. Finally, the author makes a comparison on the two rounds transitional justice carried out by either DPP or KMT, infers a transitional justice mode for Taiwan, and makes an overall review and analysis to provide advice and information for future policy development and promotion.||en_US|
|dc.subject||Ruling Party Alternation||en_US|
|dc.title||Taiwan's Experience in Transitional Justice:A Comparative Study of Two Ruling Party Alternations||en_US|
|Appears in Collections:||學位論文|
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.