許可上訴制、美國最高法院與金字塔型訴訟建構

Discretionary Review, the Supreme Court of the US and the Pyramidal Structure of the Court System

有關金字塔型訴訟之建構，是近二十多年來我國司改重要議題之一，然審視兩次司改會議之提案，皆迴避了一項重要問題，即作為金字塔頂端之法院到底應擁有何種審判權？此一議題因涉及終審法院之受理案件數量及其定位，故在整體金字塔型訴訟建構乙事上，居於關鍵地位。其中，從比較法與學理角度看，這主要是指金字塔頂端之法院，是否應賦予其許可上訴權限而言。對此，本文擬藉由對美國最高法院許可上訴制度之研究，以剖析金字塔型訴訟制度建構之要素。本文主要論點如下：首先，本文將強調，美國最高法院許可上訴制度之出現，係因歷史之偶然，但最後成為必然，是屬務實處理訴訟制度變革之結果；其次，本文將立論，於許可上訴制度下，美國最高法院並未放棄個案救濟重任，先後發展出不同機制從事此一工作，突顯了兼顧不同功能任務之艱鉅性；復次，在許可上訴制度下，最大之挑戰是在於選案機制設計，以及到底應選什麼案以及多少案，即選案質與量之問題影響深遠；最後，美國法給予吾人最大之借鏡是，許可上訴制將美國最高法院之定位轉為規範控制，以此為基礎，衍生出諸多制度上之重要變革。 To establish a pyramidal structure of the judiciary has been a paramount goal of judicial reform in Taiwan for more than two decades. Reviewing the two major proposals on this issue, we will find that the jurisdictions of a final court have not been dealt with. However, since the jurisdictions that a final court have not only determines the caseload flown to that court but also characterize the function of that final court, therefore, this is an essential issue for establish a pyramidal structure of the judiciary. By studying the discretionary review (the writ of certiorari) that the Supreme Court of the US owns, this paper would remind the legal circles in Taiwan to take this issue seriously. Based on the experience in the US, this paper would make the following four arguments. Firstly, the origin and development of the writ of certiorari evinces that we should adopt a more pragmatic approach to engage judicial reforms. Secondly, the ways that the US Supreme Court has used to make errors correction under the premise of discretionary review is worth of our attention. Thirdly, the toughest task for the US Supreme Court under the system of discretionary review is to select cases in terms of both quantity as well as quality. Finally, the most substantial contribution of discretionary review is to make the US Supreme Court become a law-making institution.