合憲性審查中的立法事實認定

Legislative Fact-Finding in Constitutional Review

作為代議機關的人民代表大會及其常委會制定的法律及地方性法規雖然有民意的支撐，但此類立法的合憲性取決於其是否有相關的社會經濟方面的事實基礎。因而，對立法事實加以認定，便成為了針對立法實施合憲性審查的重要環節。立法事實包括與立法目的有關的事實、與立法的手段和目的之關聯性相關的事實，以及作為法益衡量之前提的事實。在由司法機關針對立法的合憲性實施審查的國家，法院在認定立法事實時通常採取自製的立場。我國雖未採取由法院實施合憲性審查的體制，但考慮到審查的程序、立法機關予以回應的時限，以及審查的目的，作為審查主體的人民代表大會及其常委會亦應在認定立法事實方面保持一定程度的自制。針對立法實施合憲性審查時的自製技術包括將審查基準與不確定性原則相結合，以及程序性審查優先。

Although laws and local regulations, enacted by the people's congresses and their standing committees as representative organs, are supported with public opinions, their constitutionality rests on whether they have social or economic factual basis. Thus, the finding on legislative facts serves as a significant stage in constitutional review against legislation. Legislative facts include facts related to the aims of legislation, facts related to the relationship between the means and the aims of legislation, and facts as the premises of the balancing among legal interests. In the countries where the judicial branch undertakes the constitutional review against legislations, the courts ordinarily act in a self-restraint way in finding the legislative facts. China does not adopt the mechanism of judicial constitutional review. However, the subjects of review, namely the people's congresses and their standing committees, shall take self-restraint position to some extent as well due to the process of review, the time limit for the legislature to reply and the aim of review. The techniques of self-restraint consist of the combination of the test of scrutiny and the uncertainty doctrine, as well as the priority of the review against the process of the legislative judgment on related facts.