為人抬轎的大法官解釋第七四八號

A Commentary on the J.Y. Interpretation No.748 Relative to the Same-Sex Marriage in Taiwan Constitutional Court

大法官釋字第七四八號先將同性性傾向者之婚姻自由，理解為相同性別二人得為經營共同生活之目的，成立具有親密性及排他性之永久結合關係。惟其於審查現行民法親屬編婚姻章僅限於一男一女之適法結合、不含同性二人之永久結合關係是否違憲時，未慮及我國同性二人雖不得依現行民法親屬編第二章婚姻之規定成立永久結合關係，但民法親屬編第六章家之規範、尤其是民法第一一二三條第三項之規定，既足使同性二人得為經營共同生活之目的，成立具有親密性及排他性之永久結合關係，此為立法者本諸立法形成自由，針對兩性婚姻以外情形所作出之規範技術上的選擇決定，當無違反憲法第二二條保障婚姻自由及第七條保障平等權之虞。釋字第七四八號僅將婚姻章從婚姻與家庭整體制度中單獨抽出，作為違憲審查之標的，顯有畫地自限而斷章取義之違誤。

The purpose of this article is to analyze the J.Y. Interpretation No. 748 concerning the Same-Sex Marriage in Taiwan Constitutional Court. This article draws three critique remarks from the interpretation. Firstly, Justices of the Constitutional Court cut wrongly the relationship between Chapter II Marriage and Chapter III Parents and Children in Taiwan Family Law, and limits the object of unconstitutionality review only to the Chapter II Marriage. Secondly, Justices of the Constitutional Court ignore Art. 1223 in Chapter VI House, which could provide two persons of same-sex who live in the same household with the object of maintaining the common living permanently, acquire their house member status as a permanent union relationship. And this permanent union relationship regulated in Art. 1223 can exactly correspond to the requirement of Freedom of Marriage instituted by Justices of the Constitutional Court for the people of same-sex orientation. Thirdly, this article advocates nullifying the last part of Interpretation, which replaces the power of the legislator to decide the same-sex marriage law, by reason of violating the separation of powers in the constitutional order