論臺灣轉型正義法規中的真相權意涵──歐洲人權法院真相權判決的啟示

The Right to Truth in the Context of Transitional Justice in Taiwan: Lessons from the European Court of Human Rights

在促進轉型正義條例生效、司法院大法官作成釋字第793號解釋後，尋求並揭露威權／不義／不法／不當之歷史真相，就成為自由民主憲政國家的重要國家任務甚至義務。本文藉由爬梳國際人道法和國際人權法上的真相權概念發展，以及歐洲人權法院的真相權相關判決，分析臺灣──作為穩定常態法秩序──轉型正義法制中的不同真相權（或真相義務）概念。
與歐洲人權法院相似，臺灣的轉型正義法制採取了較為嚴格的真相權定義，主張真相權是「被害者（家屬）」請求國家「積極查核並承認」、「究責或賠償所需個案真相」的「衍生性」「個人權利」，從而區分真相權、請求近用既有（政治）檔案的資訊自由，以及查核、承認、揭露範圍及於體制真相的真相義務等不同概念。

After the Act on Promoting Transitional Justice took effect and the Grand Justices of the Taiwan Constitutional Court made Interpretation No. 793, seeking and revealing the historical truth about authoritarian/unjust/illegal/improper state actions has become an especially important task and even obligation for a free and democratic constitutional state. This article, by examining the development of the concept of the right to truth in international humanitarian law and international human rights law, as well as related judgments on the right to truth by the European Court of Human Rights, analyzes the different concepts of the right to truth (or the obligation of truth) in Taiwan’s transitional justice legal framework as a stable and normal legal order. Similar to the European Court of Human Rights, Taiwan’s transitional justice legal framework has adopted a stricter definition of the right to truth, asserting that the right to truth is a“derivative”“individual right”of“victims (and their families)”to request the state to“actively verify and acknowledge”the“case-specific truth needed for accountability or compensation”. This distinguishes the right to truth from the freedom of information to request access to existing (political) archives and the obligation of truth that extends to verifying, acknowledging, and revealing systemic truths.