黨營事業不當黨產處理之合憲性與難題：以臺南地區接收日產為例

The Constitutionality difficulty of dealing with partyowned enterprises as Ill-gotten Party Assets:The taking over Japanese Properties in Tainan region

日治時期在臺灣所遺留之日產，於戰後原本應移交給國民政府成為國家或地方自治團體所有的土地、房屋、動產等財產，中國國民黨卻透過各式手法鯨吞蠶食了應歸屬於國家的財產。學者研究指出，黨營事業接管兩大類日產：撥歸給國民黨經營的戲院；及其他會同臺灣省長官公署接管的文化事業。本文以位於臺南府城地區日產為例，分析國家追回所該等財產面臨的法律爭議。然而，不當黨產處理委員會依據「政黨及其隨附組織不當取得財產處理條例」（以下簡稱「不當黨產條例」）替國家追回財產的同時，該條例亦面臨諸多違憲的質疑，本文則試著從禁止法律溯及既往原則、時效制度適用、個別性立法的問題，試著回應與論述其合憲性。同時，針對目前黨產會適用不當黨產條例，在追索不當黨產過程中，所觀察到將面臨公私法適用的交錯、如何計算返還範圍的難題。再者，基於保障安全之意旨，建議對於有爭議之虞的不動產，先採取類似公法上事實行為的註記，藉以保障善意第三人之權益。

The Japanese colonial period properties in Taiwan, such as the land, the house and the goods, should transfer to government as national properties, but KMT (Kuomintang, The Chinese Nationalist Party) used many ways to take over those national properties. According to some experts’ studies, KMT-owned enterprises took over two kinds of Japanese colonial period properties. One is cinemas that were appropriated to KMT to operate, the other are cultural enterprises that KMT took over along with the Taiwan Provincial Governor’s office. This article focuses on the cases in Tainan area, analyze legal disputes about restituting those properties to the government. However, while CIPAS( 黨產會) is investigating ill-gotten party assets according to the Act, the act governing the settlement of ill-gotten properties by political parties and their affiliate organizations also faces the challenge of unconstitutional queries. This article tries to adopt concepts including the principle of no ex post facto law, application of statutes of limitations and prohibition of individualized law to response and to discuss the Act’s conformity with constitution interpretation. At the same time, this article also discusses the challenges regarding cross application of the public law and private law and the return range problem in the CIPAS investigation process. Furthermore, for the temporary remedy concern, this article suggests that when handling controversial real estates, it’s better for the CIPAS to use administrative real acts first, such like registering, in order to protect the rights of bona fides third party.