Hart's Legal Theory and Taiwan's Challenges in Implementing Human Rights Law

哈特的法理論與台灣在人權法實踐上的挑戰

國號中華民國的台灣,適用的是一部將近六十年前制定的憲法權利清單,且此部權利清單在實際生效適用的前四十年間,不過是紙上文件,沒有實際效力。近年來,雖然人權實踐有初步進展,但要真正具體落實憲法所保障的人權,仍需經過一個辛苦且漫長的過程。本文試圖藉由當代英美法理學上圍繞著哈特法律實證主義而起的相關論爭,包括支持與反對哈特理論的正反論點,來說明在實踐人權理念的過程中,台灣所面臨的特殊挑戰。此外,由於台灣實踐人權的經驗有其獨特的特色,其也可以被用來評價在此論爭中正反學者所提論點之優缺點,特別是朗諾‧德沃金、喬瑟夫‧拉茲與居勒斯‧科勒曼等人。本文也將呈現台灣在人權實踐上的獨特經驗,反過來對此一論爭提供新的觀點,甚至藉此對哈特的法理論予以支持、挑戰,甚至作某程度之修正。

Taiwan, the Republic of China, adopted a constitutional bill of rights almost sixty years ago, but for the first forty years this bill of rights was just a piece of paper. Further, after achieving the initial success, the process to enforce the function of human rights in Taiwan is still a laborious and time-consuming one. This paper employs probably the most prominent debate in the modern Anglo-American jurisprudence, including various discourses between H.L.A. Hart and his opponents as well as supporters, to illustrate the essential characteristics of Taiwan's challenges in carrying out the idea and the spirit of human rights. Besides, since Taiwan's experience in implementing human rights has its own defined features, it can be used to evaluate both the advantages and disadvantages of the points made out by Hart and other scholars, particularly Ronald Dworkin, Joseph Raz and Julues Coleman. This essay will, therefore, also show Taiwan's unique experience in enforcing human rights could provide some new perspectives on the famous debates between Hart and others, endorsing, challenging, and revising some parts of Hart's legal theories.