司法的“躍進”與“越界”－－反思香港終審法院之“變性人結婚權案”（W判例）

Judicial Activism and Trespass - A Critical Review on the W Decision of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal

香港終審法院於2013年5月就香港首宗變性人結婚案頒佈終審判決，裁定限制變性人W女士結婚的香港現行婚姻制定法違反《基本法》第37條所保護的結婚權。通過細觀終審法院賴以作出判決之普通法上有關變性人結婚權的一系列關鍵性先例，以及批判性地審視終審判決本身的判決理由，可以發現此終審判決有失謹慎，略顯“霸道”。主要理由有二：其一，罔顧歐洲（包括英國）與香港社會制度及實際情形的差異，“躍進”式地將歐洲做法適用於香港，導致在未經社會充分討論與研究的情況下，“強行”為現行婚姻制度帶來重大改變；其二，在司法解釋的外衣下修改了婚姻制定法，“僭越”了立法機構之權限，並造成婚姻制度上立法與司法不同步的尷尬局面。

The Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal ('CFA'）delivered its final decision on the case of W v Registrar of Marriages, the first transgender marriage case in Hong Kong. It has been decided that it is unconstitutional to restrict the right to marry when the woman applying for marriage is a transgender woman. Undoubtedly, the CFA decision had far -reaching impact on the Hong Kong society. After a careful scrutiny into the relevant common law precedents and a critical review on the CFA decision, the Author holds the position that the W decision has been made with less carefulness and with too much judicial activeness. There are two main reasons based on which the conclusion is drawn: first, it is sort of judicial activism that the CFA made substantial change to the current marriage institution before there is a full and sufficient discussion in the Hong Kong community and also before there is any evidence justifying a departure from the traditional marriage concept; secondly, it is undeniable a trespass on the power of legislature when the CFA insisted on amending the marriage law under the guise of judicial interpretation.