對政黨及其附隨組織不當取得財產處理條例聲請變更判決或宣告違憲判決之可能性

The Act Governing the Settlement of Ill-gotten Properties by Political Parties and Their Affiliate Organizations, Petition for Rehearing, Petitions Lodged by Legislators, Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 793

「政黨及其附隨組織不當取得財產處理條例」（下稱「黨產條例」）自民國（下同）105年8月10日公布施行後，除受限制之政黨（即國民黨）及相關法人組織多次嘗試向司法院大法官提起救濟外，聲請人中更不乏多位審理黨產條例事件之法官依職權聲請憲法解釋。然國民黨立委及監察院之聲請遭司法院不受理，臺北高等行政法院法官之聲請雖蒙大法官受理，但釋字第793號解釋似乎未能一槌定音，非僅作成合憲解釋部分遭到多方質疑，不受理之部分更引發迴避核心問題之譏。對此，本文將探討自黨產條例通過後，已向司法院大法官提請憲法解釋之個案聲請理由、大法官會議決議受理、不受理理由、釋字第793號解釋；於第貳部分探討針對釋字第793號解釋聲請變更判決之可能性；第參部分探討將來針對黨產條例，再行向大法官聲請解釋之可能途徑⎯⎯亦即由特定政黨或法人依憲法訴訟法第59條規定聲請法規範宣告違憲判決，或由特定政黨立法委員以憲法訴訟法第49條少數立委行使職權規定聲請法規範違憲宣告判決之可能，期供各界於未來針對黨產條例聲請宣告違憲判決之參考。

After the Act Governing the Settlement of Ill-gotten Properties by Political Parties and Their Affiliate Organizations (“the Act”) was implemented on August 10, 2016, not only the specific party Kuomintang (“KMT”) and relevant organizations but also judges from Administrative Court lodged petitions for declaring the Act unconstitutional. Although the petitions lodged by the judges were accepted and decided by the Judicial Yuan, Interpretation No. 793 only dealt with a few statutes in the Act. Consequently, the author will discuss the petitions submitted to the Judicial Yuan, the reasons for Judicial Yuan accepting or rejecting the petitions, and Interpretation No. 793. In the second part, this article will research the feasibility of requesting the Constitutional Court to alter Interpretation No. 793 or petitioning for declaring the Act unconstitutional under the Constitutional Court Procedure Act.