國際勞工組織及其公約對台灣之意義：從普世性與三方治理談起

The Meaning of International Labour Organisation and its Conventions to Taiwan: Debating on its Universality and Tripartite Governance

本研究旨在透過國際勞工組織及其公約之普世性原則以及三方治理架構，解析我國與國際勞工組織之間過去到現在之權義關係。首先從三方治理架構之詮釋，具體描述三方架構下各國勞雇代表團體參與治理之各種管道，以及勞雇團體如何運用監督機制實質參與國勞組織運作並保障勞動權利，以及該組織對普世性原則之詮釋。其次以史料分析法還原1971年國府喪失中國代表權之正反論述，歸納出我國因喪失會籍導致台灣人民未僅無法得到國勞公約之持續保障，而以目前兩岸分治之現況，中國政府並無法有效統治台灣，中國之勞雇代表亦無法代表台灣之勞雇組織，使台灣成為國勞公約普世性原則適用之空白地帶。最後歸結出台灣應加強普世價值與三方架構之法理論述，藉以開啟實質參與國際勞工組織之人權對話。

This study aims to analyse the rights and responsibilities of Taiwan and the ILO (International Labour Organization) under the universality principle and tripartism enshrined in the ILO's constitution and conventions. To begin with, author introduces how organisations of workers and employers take an active part in the ILO supervisory system, and interprets the essence of tripartite governance. The author also gives equal importance to the presentation of the universality principle in the context of the ILO. Second, using historical analysis, the author explains the debates that took place during the Governing Body Conference held in November 1971, regarding China's representation in the ILO. The core issue raised in all the debates was that Taiwanese nationals'labour rights, under the protection of universality principle, would fall vacant. Finally, considering that the ILO labour standards do not protect Taiwan, nor can the authorities of the People's Republic of China effectively enforce the ratified provisions of its conventions, it will be prudent to apply the universality principle and tripartite representation, to start a rights-based talk with the ILO.