風險社會下的環評制度與法院－－司法系統與社會脈絡的相互建構

EIA Law and the Court in the Risk Society - the Mutual Construction of the Court System and its Social Context

學界檢討環評制度運作，除了在立法論層次上進行制度興革的論述之外，另一個重要的面向則為法院應如何站在司法審查的角度來監督行政部門。本文從在地風險社會結構的轉變，觀察到我國司法審查制度亟需變革的挑戰。台灣自1980年代以來公眾風險感知已產生重要變化，社會逐步質疑技術官僚專家政治的正當性。另一方面，短短數十年快速擠壓的工業化過程，卻無法蘊生強健的公民社會來監督政府，因此，整個社會呈現政治、經濟系統與理性獨大的局面，並抑制風險溝通與民主參與環境決策的空間。這兩個互為矛盾的發展脈絡，皆凸顯在環評制度上法院需要重新調整司法控制與監督角色的迫切性。本文指出，單純以國會法律授權控制（傳送帶模式）以及行政資源專業性的功能論思考（專家模式），尚不足充分賦予行政權在專業行政決定上的正當性基礎。因此，著重民主參與以及程序正義，為法院在台灣風險社會結構下面對環評司法審查重要的考量點。本文主張，法院應放寬當事人適格的門檻，以救濟弱勢者並強化環評訴訟之公民參與，同時，在專業行政決定方面，司法審查者需要先區分該環評行政決定是第一階段環評或是第二階段環評的審查結論，並可參考美國司法判決所發展出的禁止恣意、武斷原則以及嚴格的程序審查標準，使法院能藉由司法控制來促成行政決策的程序理性與風險溝通。

Academic discussion of the operation of environmental impact assessment must look not only at institutional reform at the level of legislation, but also at the court's approach regarding the exercise of juridical review to supervise the executive branch. In examining structural changes in Taiwan's risk society, this article highlights the urgent need for reform of the country's juridical review system. Public risk perception has changed dramatically since the 1980s, when society gradually began to question the legitimacy of technocratic politics. Over the last several decades, rapid industrialization and lack of a robust civil society capable of supervising the government led to the domination of Taiwan's political decision-making by political and economic forces. Consequently, the gap between risk communication and democratic participation in environmental decision-making processes has narrowed. These two paradoxical contexts of development create the necessity for the court to adjust and enhance its role as juridical supervisor of the institutions of environmental impact assessment. Through in-depth analysis of Taiwan's political and social context, this article calls attention to the fact that the legal authority of congress (transmission model) and the function of administrative professionals (expert model) are unable to provide a basis for the legitimacy of the executive power. In the context of Taiwan's risk society, emphasizing democratic participation and procedural justice should be an important consideration for the court in its approach to judicial review of environmental impact assessment. This article argues that the court should lower the threshold for relieving minorities and enforcing public participation in litigation. On the other hand, drawing from U.S. judicial review, the court should adopt procedures employing the hard look doctrine and require the executive's decision to be non-arbitrary, non-capricious and not abusive in terms of discretion, thereby facilitating rationality and risk communication in the process of administrative decision making.