論政黨接收國有特種財產的追繳：兼談黨產取得的多元化脈絡

On the Recovery of Political Parties Assets Taken from the National Special Assets: Also on the Diverse Contexts about the acquisition of Political Parties Properties

日治時期結束後，日本政府及日本人民留下大量財產讓中華民國政府接 收，原本日本人民及企業所有的財產經訓政時期中國國民黨國防委員會核准轉 帳撥用中國國民黨台灣省黨部經營並由行政院執行，進入憲政時期後，此等財 產的基地所有權均登記予中國國民黨，部分財產輾轉移轉給其他私人或為政府 徵收，由中國國民黨接收價金。台灣於 2016 年透過法定的組織及程序將黨產 的追繳法制化，追繳範圍及國民黨持有此等財產的正當性成為探討重點。本文 透過文獻整理回顧歷史事實，並以公法學理分析此等問題。發現台灣面對多重 統治者更迭的殖民歷史，中華民國歷經訓政時期及憲政時期，此等歷史經驗在 全世界轉型正義的國家都具有特殊性。除部分事實有待資料公開來進一步分析 外，也發現黨產取得來源包括日本私人財產、原本即屬國產者、戰後以不正方 式自台灣人民取得者，呈現多元化的現象。國民黨作為引領國家進入憲政的執 政黨應有基本的民主素養；轉帳過程跨越訓政時期及憲政時期也應適用不真正 溯及既往原則；訓政時期決定與後續憲政時期移轉所有權在決策同一性上也有 斷裂；主張取得此等財產是為補償戰爭損失的主張也不具說服力。凡此都顯示 為追求台灣的民主深化，有必要對此等財產做更細緻的調查及追繳。

After the Japanese colonial rule, Japanese and the Japan government left numerous property for Chinese Nationalist government to take over. Originally, the property which had owned by Japanese and Japanese company were approved to be appropriated to Taiwan Province Branch of The Nationalist Party(KMT) by the Supreme National Defense Council (SNDC) of Chinese Nationalist Party, which were carried out by the Executive Yuan during the period of Political Tutelage of the Republic of China. However, when the constitutional period came, those assets' ownership were all registered by KMT, and part of them were transferred to other people or expropriated by the government later, and the KMT take the payment. In 2016, through the legalization of ill-gotten party assets settlement committee and the law relating about pursuing the ill-gotten party assets in Taiwan, the pursuing range and the problem of legitimacy about KMT owning those property become the focus of discussion. This article reviews historical facts through studying the related literature, and analyze this question with the method of adopting public law theories. The author found that Taiwan faced a colonial history with several colonist and went through the period of Political Tutelage and went into current constitutional period. These Taiwan's experiences are unique compared even with other countries' with Transitional Justice problems. More historical materials are required to understand Taiwan's past. The author also found that the ill-gotten party assets have diversified origins, including individual Japanese's property, original national property, and property gotten from Taiwanese people through illegal ways. As used to be a guide bringing Taiwan into constitutionalism, the KMT should embrace some basic democratic principles. Dealing the transferring process of these assets crossing the period of Political Tutelage and the period of constitutionalism should adopt the principle of “Non-Real Retrospective Application.” There exists a problem of fracture on decision-making consistency between the decision-making during the period of Political Tutelage and the transferring process under constitutionalism. The opinions that taking these properties as War Compensation are not persuasive. Above all, for pursuing “democratic deeping,” more thorough investigation and recovery of these properties are needed.