法律效力作為法律存在的方式

The Legal Validity as an Existential Way of Law

法律是一個複雜的現象，從而用於描述法律之存在的概念「法律效力」亦是一個極為複雜、又屢遭批評的概念，以致於以「存在」之法律作為研究對象的法學也遭致許多困擾。這些批評或困擾，包括了循環定義、無限倒退或恣意終止的問題；法律與法學在本體論地位上的曖昧；語言的界線與法律體系成員的不確定性等。由於法律概念很難在現實世界中找到語意上直接的指涉，因此概念與規則的解釋往往涉及解釋者的意志或選擇，衍生了規則的衝突或可駁倒性，以及證成了法律原則的存在，從而法律體系的成員也變成不確定了。
透過Savigny與Kelsen兩大理論典範的對照，本文希望燭照出法律在本體論、知識論及方法論，與倫理學之間的複雜匯聚，以及與政治體制、正法理論之間的關係。最終提出三個可以作為未來進一步探究的方向：重新審視法律實證主義的理論初衷、從方法論上釐清法律實證主義的「實然」概念，並從實證主義之核心的經驗主義從新思考經驗、語言與真理的關係。

This study is aimed at reviewing the regulations of criminal law related to drug abusing in Taiwan from the perspective of present international regulations regarding counter-drugs and crime, particularly based on the policies of Germany and European countries. In the aspect of lawmaking, this study focuses on the interpretation of elements constituting drug abusing, the regulation design concerning drug rehabilitation (e.g., restriction, rehabilitating observation, and enforcement), and the need of decriminalizing drug using. In the aspect of judiciary, this study is aimed discussing how to determine the verdict of taking drugs multiple times. Since successive offenses were abolished on Sep. 1st 2006, the determination of multiple drug abusing has caused great disagreement. The resolution of the Supreme Court in 2007 did not settle somedisputes (e.g., successive offenses, continual offenses, and collaborative offenses). In practice, in addition to criminal punishment, drug abusers shall receive rehabil ita tive measures. However, the present frameworkof rehabilitating observation and restriction enforcement is incomplete and drug abusers tend to commit crimes again. In this case, it is necessary to make an overall review of the practice.