Kelsen's Concept of Constitutional Review Accord in Europe and Asia: The Grand Justices in Taiwan

凱爾森之憲法審查概念在歐亞的實踐:以台灣之司法院大法官為例

當韓思‧凱爾森(Hans Kelsen)於1920年為奧地利草創其憲法審查體系之時,他同時也試圖將其適用到歐洲和亞洲其他國家的憲法法院。他試圖從制度上根本解決憲法審查在民主國家之正當性問題,也相信唯有放棄將政治性神學作為憲法審查的基礎,才能為現代的憲法審查開創一條嶄新的道路。台灣司法院大法官憑藉其憲法上的專業,守護著台灣民主轉型的過程,其表現令人印象深刻。結構與詮釋方法是他們權威背後的基石,但此一基石在台灣試圖學習美國最高法院制度模式的潮流下,正逐漸受到挑戰。本文檢驗司法違憲審查的基礎,並針對台灣司法院大法官一些相關的制度特性,來重新檢驗這些基礎。

When Hans Kelsen drafted the system of constitutional judicial review in Austria 1920, he designed a model for quiet a number of constitutional courts in Europe and Asia. He also dealt with questions of how to institutionally solve problems of legitimizing constitutional review in democratic societies. Kelsen believed that only the disposal of all polit-theological ballast" would path the way to a modern constitutional system. The Grand Judges in Taiwan had to guard an impressive transitional process with constitutional expertise. Structure and interpretative approach have been a backbone of their authority. This is challenged by a twist towards a Supreme Court model based on the U.S. system. The paper examines the foundations of judicial review and puts them into perspective to the relevant institutional qualities of the Grand Judges.