| 中文摘要 |
本文著重於國家人權機構之全球比較分析，並從歷史發展及類型模式兩個角度論述。各國成立國家人權機構之時間，與民主發展、憲政制度、經濟程度沒有直接關係。比較明顯的是，1990年至2009年這二十年是設立國家人權機構之高峰期，約有77%的國家人權機構在此時期設立，這與國際推動有關。當台灣在2000年提出設立國家人權委員會的理念時，國際上已有約十年期間的快速成長，而台灣至今尚未成立國家人權機構。「巴黎原則」並沒有要求各國要建構哪一種類型之國家人權機構，本文將國家人權機構區分為五種類型，包括人權諮詢委員會、單一職權委員會、混和機制、人權監察使、獨立人權委員會等。而採用哪一種模式有區域特質，在美洲有高達86%美洲國家選擇人權監察使模式，有高達80%非洲國家選擇獨立人權委員會，在亞洲亦有高達85%國家選擇獨立人權委員會。以全球之分布比例而言，獨立人權委員會佔最高比例，其次為人權監察使。在台灣討論設立國家人權機構的過程中，只有提及以獨立人權委員會或是監察使模式設立之。本文認為應以修憲成立國家人權委員會，作為在台灣設立國家人權機構的最優先考量。所有國家人權機構中，有65%的國家人權機構被其認定為A等級，26%為B等級，9%為C等級或是沒有等級。對於台灣而言，吾人或許亦可認知其實時間、區域、類型都不是影響國家人權機構評比結果之主要因素，更重要的是職權完整及組織獨立，這亦是台灣在思考設立國家人權機構時應完善考量的。
This paper's analyses focus on global comparative review of national human rights institutions (NHRIs) through angles of historical development and model type. It is quite obvious that 77% of NHRIs were established in twenty years between 1990 and 2009. It was the achievement of international promotion. When Taiwan proposed the establishment of a NHRI in 2000, such trend had been flourishing for a decade. Taiwan has not yet established her NHRI. Paris Principles do not require states to follow a specific model. In this paper NHRIs are classified into five types including human rights advisory commission, single function commission, hybrid mechanism, human rights ombudsman and independent human rights commission. About 86% American states choose human rights ombudsman, while 80% of African states and 85% of Asia-Pacific states are in favour of independent human rights commission. At global level independent human rights commission gains top rate and human rights ombudsman gets the second. In Taiwan only independent human rights commission and human rights ombudsman are mentioned in respect bills. This paper argues that the top priority is to amend the Constitution to establish a NHRI. Among all NHRIs 65% are accredited as A status, 26% are B status and 9% are C status. It is important for Taiwan to know that function and independence are key factors of accreditation. |
本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
