兩岸關係對我國公民投票法影響之研究
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2005
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
兩岸關係對我國公民投票法影響之研究
摘 要
公民投票是自由民主世界實踐「主權在民」理論的重要機制，也是參與式的民主理論興起後，各民主國家為落實直接民主制度，而以人民的直接參與來彰顯國民主權原則，並藉以彌補代議制度缺失的重要制度。
儘管我國憲法僅明文授權人民對於創制權與複決權的行使，並未提及「公民投票」的字眼，但創制權與複決權實分別為公民投票的一種形式，也可以說公民投票權的行使，實際上涵蓋著創制權與複決權的行使。我國憲法第二條明定：「中華民國之主權屬於國民全體」，即是確認國家權力係源自於國民主權之原則。準此，透過公民投票法的制定與施行，一則既可藉以深化民主、落實國民主權之原則；再則也可讓台灣實施民主的經驗與世界民主先進國家的主流價值接軌，成為台灣對抗共產專制與避免被赤化的有效屏障；三則經由全球化的效應，希望能讓台灣地區的民主化成果，成為華人世界的共同資產與榮耀，進而成為中國大陸民主化的催化劑，甚或至少對於中國大陸的民主化產生一定程度的燈塔效應，最終透過民主制度中的理性、理解、尊重與包容，和平解決台海兩岸的爭議。
然而，公民投票法的制定與施行，在台灣有其不可避免的潛在困境。首先就台灣的社會外部環境而言，台海兩岸因意識形態的差異，造成兩岸對政治、經濟、社會制度與生活方式的不同選擇。因此，無論兩岸在武裝對峙時期，或冷戰結束時代，台灣都必須依賴美國才能避免中共的併吞。也因此，美國與中共之間的關係，就成為美台關係的溫度計。換言之，台灣處於美、中、台兩岸三角關係的架構中，除了必須考量美國的兩岸政策外，中共與美國之間的關係及中共對台灣的政策，也都會成為影響台灣內政、外交政策決策的重要因素。
再就台灣的社會內部環境來說，國內藍、綠陣營，由於對於國家未來發展的不同認知與期待，在台灣民主化的決策過程中，除了必須重視外部環境的輸入內容外，也各自形塑了不同的政策規畫與理想目標。問題是藍、綠陣營這些因對未來不同想像，而形塑之各自不同的政策規畫與理想目標，會在追求或尊重普世民主價值的前提下，取得適度的妥協與共識？抑或將因意識形態的差距過大，及各自在競逐大位、取得執政權之選票極大化的考量下，分別動員各自支持群眾並深化彼此對立的意識形態，馴至犧牲了公民投票制度應有之中立的工具性格，而將公民投票制度扭曲或濫用，藉以遂行各自特定的政治目的，使公民投票不但不能成為民主社會中定亂止紛的民主機制，反而成為民主過程的亂源或不幸，致引人質疑公民投票制度之於民主體制的必要性與重要性。
本研究除逐一檢視可能影響我國公民投票法之制定與施行的各項社會內、外部環境因素外，更將探討在這些因素下所具現的我國公民投票法之可能缺失，並以我國第一次實施的全國性公民投票為例深入體檢，以為日後修法定制的參考。
關鍵字：
公民投票；創制權；複決權；直接民主制度；國民主權；兩岸關係；兩岸政策
A Study of the Development of Cross-Strait Relations And the Enactment of Plebiscite Laws Abstract The enactment of plebiscite laws is the most critical mechanism for a democratic society to exercise the sovereign right of its people. With the direct involvement of its people, a plebiscite system reinforces the idea of participatory democracy and addresses, corrects some of the flaws embedded in the practice of democracy through representation. The constitution of the Republic of China bestows upon its people the right to institute laws through initiative and referendum, with no direct mention of the term “plebiscite”. Nevertheless, it is appropriate to point out that through initiative and referendum, a plebiscite system is actually in place, and the very spirit of a plebiscite system is fully captured therein. As manifested in the constitution: “the sovereign power of the Republic of China resides in and belongs to all its people”, and therefore, the enactment and effectuation of plebiscite laws allow Taiwan to advance into a new frontier of participatory democracy; it also gets Taiwan on the same track with rest of the democratic world; further, the sweeter fruit of a more democratic Taiwan may become the and glory and hope shared and cherished by Chinese everywhere, and eventually may result in a freer Mainland China and bring peace much longed-for by people in both sides of the strait. To enact and effectuate plebiscite laws, however, means Taiwan must face and solve some foreseeable and yet inevitable difficulties. Due to ideological differences, Taiwan and mainland have made different choices and wide discrepancies in political, economic, societal situations have made the cross-strait relations confrontational. To Maintain its sovereignty, Taiwan needs the help form the United States of America. Consequently, Taiwan, The Mainland, and the United States form an interactive triangle, and the cross-strait relation is not linear but triangular. Any subtle change in the relations between the United States and the Mainland not only may bring great fluctuations to the cross-strait relation but also result in great societal, political, and economic consequences for the people in Taiwan. As a result, the decisions of the enactment and effectuation of plebiscite laws must be made within the frame of reference of the Taiwan-the U. S.-mainland triangle. The internal environments represent even greater challenges for both the ruling and the opposing parties in Tawan. The two sides have contradicting visions and expectations for Taiwan’s tomorrow, and the society is becoming more chaotic and less tolerant to the expression of opposing views. Without compromises and reconciliations between the two camps, a plebiscite system may become a device for the stronger to suppress the different opinions from the weaker. As such, there will be no room for a plebiscite system to work effectively and properly perform its function. The current study will closely examine the internal, external environmental factors that may have direct or indirect impacts on the enactment and effectuation of plebiscite laws. Further, this research will propose tentative solutions to correct possible imperfections of plebiscite laws in the days to come. Key Word: Plebiscite; Initiative; Referendum; Direct Democracy; Popular Sovereignty; Cross-Strait Relations; Cross-Strait Policy.
A Study of the Development of Cross-Strait Relations And the Enactment of Plebiscite Laws Abstract The enactment of plebiscite laws is the most critical mechanism for a democratic society to exercise the sovereign right of its people. With the direct involvement of its people, a plebiscite system reinforces the idea of participatory democracy and addresses, corrects some of the flaws embedded in the practice of democracy through representation. The constitution of the Republic of China bestows upon its people the right to institute laws through initiative and referendum, with no direct mention of the term “plebiscite”. Nevertheless, it is appropriate to point out that through initiative and referendum, a plebiscite system is actually in place, and the very spirit of a plebiscite system is fully captured therein. As manifested in the constitution: “the sovereign power of the Republic of China resides in and belongs to all its people”, and therefore, the enactment and effectuation of plebiscite laws allow Taiwan to advance into a new frontier of participatory democracy; it also gets Taiwan on the same track with rest of the democratic world; further, the sweeter fruit of a more democratic Taiwan may become the and glory and hope shared and cherished by Chinese everywhere, and eventually may result in a freer Mainland China and bring peace much longed-for by people in both sides of the strait. To enact and effectuate plebiscite laws, however, means Taiwan must face and solve some foreseeable and yet inevitable difficulties. Due to ideological differences, Taiwan and mainland have made different choices and wide discrepancies in political, economic, societal situations have made the cross-strait relations confrontational. To Maintain its sovereignty, Taiwan needs the help form the United States of America. Consequently, Taiwan, The Mainland, and the United States form an interactive triangle, and the cross-strait relation is not linear but triangular. Any subtle change in the relations between the United States and the Mainland not only may bring great fluctuations to the cross-strait relation but also result in great societal, political, and economic consequences for the people in Taiwan. As a result, the decisions of the enactment and effectuation of plebiscite laws must be made within the frame of reference of the Taiwan-the U. S.-mainland triangle. The internal environments represent even greater challenges for both the ruling and the opposing parties in Tawan. The two sides have contradicting visions and expectations for Taiwan’s tomorrow, and the society is becoming more chaotic and less tolerant to the expression of opposing views. Without compromises and reconciliations between the two camps, a plebiscite system may become a device for the stronger to suppress the different opinions from the weaker. As such, there will be no room for a plebiscite system to work effectively and properly perform its function. The current study will closely examine the internal, external environmental factors that may have direct or indirect impacts on the enactment and effectuation of plebiscite laws. Further, this research will propose tentative solutions to correct possible imperfections of plebiscite laws in the days to come. Key Word: Plebiscite; Initiative; Referendum; Direct Democracy; Popular Sovereignty; Cross-Strait Relations; Cross-Strait Policy.
Description
Keywords
公民投票, 創制權, 複決權, 直接民主制度, 國民主權, 兩岸關係, 兩岸政策, Plebiscite, Initiative, Referendum, Direct Democracy, Popular Sovereignty, Cross-Strait Relations, Cross-Strait Policy