Minority Rights and Democratic Consensus: The Irish Same-Sex Marriage Referendum

少數者權利與民主共識：愛爾蘭同婚公投

世界上已有29個國家將同性婚姻合法化，其中，22個國家透過立法，4個國家透過司法的判決、2個國家透過同時立法以及司法、1個國家透過公民投票的方式達到這個目的。愛爾蘭在2015年時所舉辦的同性婚姻公投被批評是將少數人的權利留給大眾決定，但這種批評其實錯誤地理解了愛爾蘭公投的法律及社會背景。在愛爾蘭，憲法修正的一個必要元素是要求發起公民投票的行動者必須匯聚有利於同性婚姻的強烈民主共識以確實保障少數人的權利。若公民投票是政治人物可以恣意選擇是否發起，而非透過法律明文加以規範時，此種公民投票所可能帶來的利益即不可能會發生。這也是愛爾蘭的經驗不太容易可以直接被其他法域所學習的原因。不過，愛爾蘭同性婚姻公投運動依然可以為其他同性婚姻行動者帶來一些可以學習之處，尤其是如何訴說同性戀者的故事以及其他公民們對同性戀的回應。此或許比去建構一些公共價值（如：平等權）更為重要。

29 countries in the world have introduced same-sex marriage. 22 have done so by legislation, four by judicial decision, two by a combination of judicial decision and legislation, and one by popular referendum. The Irish same-sex marriage referendum of 2015 has been criticised for putting minority rights to a popular vote. This criticism largely misunderstands the legal and social context of the Irish referendum, however. A necessary component of constitutional amendment, the referendum required campaigners to build a robust democratic consensus in favour of same-sex marriage, strongly entrenching minority rights. These benefits would likely not have arisen, however, if a referendum had been a choice on the part of political actors rather than a legal necessity. It is therefore unlikely that the Irish experience, whatever its merits, can be straightforwardly translated to other jurisdictions. Nevertheless, the Irish referendum campaign yields some lessons for other activist campaigns for same-sex marriage. In particular, the story-telling of gay people--and the responses of their fellow citizens--may have been more significant than the articulation of more public values, such as equality.