論「裁判憲法審查」──制度的繼受、施行與展望（下）

A Study on the Judicial Review of the Court Decisions: Institutional Succession, Implementation and Prospects

立法院於2018年12月18日修改「司法院大法官審理案件法」為「憲法訴訟法」，並訂於2022年1月4日生效施行，本法於日後即作為釋憲程序的一部基礎性法律。而相對於舊法的一個最大變革，即是本法於「人民聲請釋憲」的類型中增加其聲請對象包含有「法院裁判」，大法官依此可審查法院裁判的合憲性，亦即採行了所謂的「裁判憲法審查」制度。此制度明確係因襲德國「判決憲法訴願」而來，然吾國對之繼受的背景與基礎如何、以及二國的法律規定間又有何種差異，當值基礎性的探究。同時德國對此制度尚非無爭議，彼邦相關討論又可為吾國提供何種借鏡，乃至本制度於吾國的施行更可能有德國所無之本土化的困境存在，且未來又將面臨何種問題等，均屬與此制度施行有關之重要課題。本文即對前述問題加以討論，且亦就此於吾國未來施行的展望，提出預測與建議。

The Legislative Yuan (Taiwan, ROC) amended the “Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act” to become the “Constitutional Court Procedure Act” on Dec. 18, 2018, which will come into force on Jan. 04, 2022. The new Act will serve as a fundamental law to govern the procedure for judicial interpretations. The major reform specified in the new act is the inclusion of “court judgments” as an added legal object for Constitutional petitions by the people. The new act thus adopts a procedure of “constitutional complaint concerning a judgment” for Justices to examine the constitutionality of a court decision.The added framework for the judicial review was adopted from the German system of “constitutional complaint concerning a judgement”. Thus, this paper argues that basic research on the legislative backgrounds, fundamental theories, and regulatory differences between Taiwan and Germany are essential for localized practice. It suggests that special attention should be paid to observe debates over the said system in Germany. The transplantation of such a foreign system also merits further studies along with possible challenges in domestic implementation. Hence, this paper aims to investigate and explore the above issues as well as to provide the prospects of the enforcement so as to propose feasible suggestions and recommendations for implementing the system in Taiwan.