全國國土計畫（草案）法律問題分析──以國土功能分區劃設合法性為中心

Legal Institutional Analysis on “The National Land Use Plan in Taiwan (draft)”: Focusing on Legitimacy of Zoning Regulatory for Functional Areas

我國自2016年5月1日起即施行「國土計畫法」（下稱「國土法」），該法第45條第1項規定，中央主管機關（亦即內政部營建署）須於2018年5月1日以前公告實施「全國國土計畫」，於是其乃先行擬定該計畫之草案（下稱「計畫草案」），其中「國土功能分區及其分類之劃設條件、劃設順序、土地使用指導事項」乃得指導後續地方（直轄市、縣、市）主管機關擬定其國土計畫之重要規範事項，從而進一步確定所屬計畫範圍內四大國土功能分區之最終「區位」，而得據以發生拘束人民土地財產權之法律效力（例如使用內容確定及其變更准駁等），是該計畫草案之內容至為重要。有鑑於此，本文乃從「法治國」以及計畫法上相關原則之側面，論述中央主管機關擬定計畫草案以及（未來）地方主管機關擬定其國土計畫所涉相關問題，例如後者對前須有「配合」、「注意」，或「考量」義務；而前者對於後者則發生「指導」等功能。此外，計畫草案所涉「計畫目標」、「基本原則」以及「劃設原則」等概念，究竟於計畫法上之意涵為何？如何詮釋？而上、下級兩計畫機關所適用之「相互制衡」，其意涵又為何？均屬重要課題（問題意識）。而由於（未來）地方國土計畫對人民土地財產權將發生拘束效力，是於其研訂過程中除須恪遵前揭計畫草案之內容外，尚須注意有無符合行政法上「合法性」所導出相關原則之意旨。而本文為此乃以「正當法律（行政）程序」為詮釋合法性之意涵，並將其細分為「程序正當」與「實質正當」兩面向予據以分析計畫草案。茲經由本文分析後提出下述議題以作為其結論：1.對於人民計畫參與權利與司法救濟（程序正當）方面：其蓋可包括事前性人民參與（國土計畫）以及事後性權利（司法）救濟兩面向，於前者之規範意旨之下，計畫機關須遵循所謂八大參與原則；至於後者則中央主管機關必須建構一套法規範審查制度，以資解決相關問題；2.國土計畫規劃機關權責分配與衝突協調（實質正當）方面：其包括：(1)上級機關所擬定位計畫所涉（例如）「計畫目標」與「基本原則」之意涵必須具體、明確，下級機關始得遵守有據，但必須讓後者保有計畫形成權利，以收因地制宜之效；(2)下級計畫機關雖對上級機關所擬上位計畫負有遵循義務，但同時亦享有計畫裁量權原則，但不得牴觸裁量餘地等相關原則；以及(3)上、下級計畫主管機關倘欲落實計畫法上相互制衡原則之意旨，則中央主管機關須修正相關法律（例如行政訴訟法），以茲因應。

The National Land Use Planning Act (NLPA) has come into force on the A.D.2016.5.1 of promulgation. Art 45.1of the NLPA specify that central authority (construction and planning agency ministry of the interior) must announce the National Land Use Plan (NLP) before A.D.2018.5.1. The central authority proposes the draft of NLP. That includes functional zone and establishment of land use permit systems and regulatory measures for land use control. It will guide local authori-ties to propose it’s the important matter of draft of NLP. The NLP will decide the final zone of functional zone at plan scope further, and occur legal validity to restrict the property right of people. So the content of draft of NLP is very important. In view of this, this article discusses questions about the central authority and local authorities propose the draft of NLP from rule of law and plan of principle. For instance, the latter has obligation to the former that include cooperate, notice and consider. Besides, the draft of NLP involves with many concepts including plan goals, basic principle and draw principle. What is meaning at plan act? How do we interpret? What check and balance meaning between higher authorities and lower authorities? All the above questions belong to important topic. Because the future NLP of local authorities will restrict the property of people, it not only must abide by the draft of NLP, but also take notice of whether conform to legality in administrative law. This article base on due process of law as a way to interpret what is the legality meaning. We separate it from procedural due process and substantive due process to analysis the draft of NLP. We propose some topics for discussion as conclusion. 1. The right to participate in plan and procedural due process: It includes the beforehand right to participate in plan and remedial procedure. The planning agencies must abide by eight principles about participating. To solve disputes, the central authority must construct a system of laws and regulations review; 2. Land planning agency is to distribute and conflict coordinate: (1) higher authorities must propose a specific and clear plan: plan goals, basic principle, for instance. It will lead to lower authorities can comply. (2) even though lower authorities has obligation to abide by the plan was proposed by higher authorities, they have the plan discretion simultaneously. But they can’t violate relevant principles about the plan discretion. (3) higher authorities and lower authorities want to implement the principle of check and balance. The central authority need to amend the related law (like administrative litigation act).