從公法人理論與實踐發展觀察部落公法人

Tribal Public Juristic Persons Derived from the Practical and Theoretical Development of Public Juristic Persons

原住民族基本法第二條之一規定，經原住民族委員會核定之部落為公法人。據此，我國行政組織法上將再增添公法人之實踐。行政組織法學理上向來不缺乏對於公法人的討論，惟立法實務上對此類型組織始終相當遲疑。在通過行政法人法之後，實務上出現越來越多的行政機關法人化的實踐。本文欲從理論與實務發展探討，部落公法人與公法人概念的關連性，以及此類公法人與既存的公法人類型的異同為何。從部落公法人立法資料觀察，此一立法似乎以「重建部落傳統組織、準備原住民族自治以及原住民族集體權利行使」為目的，而選擇以「公法人」組織形式作為達成上述目的。就此而言，部落公法人的設置似為部落自治的過渡形式或者協助達成自治之目的的中間組織，目前法制規劃是否有助於此一目的達成，有待進一步探討。

Article 2-1 of the Indigenous Peoples Basic Law in Taiwan states that a tribe ratified by the Council of Indigenous Peoples shall be regarded as a public juristic person; this enactment signifies another successful implementation of public juristic person on the basis of Administrative Organization Law. It is not scarce for academia discussions on public judicial person in Administrative Organization Law; however, the legislative is generally hesitant about passing the relevant legislations in favor of this type of organization. The number of incorporated administrative agencies progressively increased after 2011, when the Non-Departmental Public Bodies Act was passed. From the perspectives of theory and practice, this study examined the relationship between the concept of tribal public juristic persons and other types of public juristic persons and explored the differences between them. The enactment of legislation on tribal public juristic persons emphasizes “re-establishment of indigenous traditional organizations, preparation for self-governance of indigenous people, and the exercise of tribal collective rights,” and legislators have chosen to attain these goals through the development of public juristic persons. The tribal public juristic persons established appear to be a transitional entity toward tribal selfgovernance or an intermediate organization for assisting the implementation of self-governance. Whether the planning and design of current legislation facilitate the realization of the goals aforementioned awaits further investigation.