傷害之後，法律如何動起來：臺灣油症公害的法律與社會研究（1979－1990）

How the Law Was Mobilized after the Harm Was Done: A Social-Legal Study of Yu Cheng (1979-1990)

本文以1979年臺灣油症為個案，探討戒嚴體制下的毒物公害法律動員過程如何多元、運用法律之方式如何受行動者背景與威權體制影響，及行動主體如何影響既有法律機會結構。本文首先分析臺灣油症的紛爭發展歷程，指出戒嚴體制下國家在傷害命名、形塑咎責對象與主張上具有主導性。再者，本文分析油症爆發後的自救行動，指出陳情和請願，在援用法律資源、追究政府責任程度上非常不同；自救訴訟難以開啟，主因是近用法律的知識與經濟門檻。第三部分，本文分析消基會義務律師團協助開啟的油症訴訟，指出1980年代法院的因果關係認定標準，使原告訴訟請求策略性轉向精神賠償；當時民事訴訟法導出的「過失責任主義」影響訴訟勝敗；法律扶助制度闕如，衍伸出「即便勝訴也無法受償」的困境。本文最末將油症訴訟與近年公害指標裁判對照，指出法院如何因應科學在認定損害上的限制、法院與原告對毒物侵權賠償之認知差異，是自油症案延續之今，尚待解答的議題。

In 1979, the Yu Cheng (literally, “oil disease”) disaster occurred in Taiwan. It became one of the most disastrous polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) poisonings ever recorded worldwide. The incident marked only the beginning of the suffering experienced by the victims exposed to these toxic chemicals. This study analyzes how people mobilized the law in various ways to speak for the injured. The author first examines how Yu Cheng moved from an incident to a dispute in which the government was the key agent. This study then investigates the self-help actions of the victims, who tended to mobilize the law outside the courts. For example, they petitioned to sue the government based on the State Compensation Law, while their real intent was to negotiate for a decent medical allowance. Finally, analyzing the court actions taken, the author finds that, however successful the litigation was at first, the Civil Code and the principles the court adopted eventually distorted the content of their claims and diverted the outcome away from the plaintiffs' wishes. The study ends by discussing the transformation of toxic harm torts in Taiwan between the 1980s and 2000s by comparing this case with two industrial hazard cases: RCA and Dioxin pollution.