| 中文摘要 |
軍隊有關軍人行政中立之宣導，會引用憲法第138條、第139條，及國防法第6條之規定作為法律上依據，禁止國軍參與政治性活動或有政治性言論。惟就憲法學而言，是否可從憲法基本國策章中之條文，直接作為限制軍人政治性言論的依據，似有爭論的餘地；而國防法第6條規定，明顯體現出其立法目的主要在限制長官於軍中強迫宣傳政黨信仰，讓下級軍人免受政黨控制，而可以自由加入政黨，解釋上用在限制軍人的政治性言論，恐難以看出其關聯性。在現今軍人行政中立相關法規範不明確的情況下，若因無明確規範而將軍人本身政治性言論之權利過度限縮，實為弔詭，故其法律上的限度究竟為何乃本研究探討重點。本研究介紹美國就軍人言論自由限制的法律及行政命令，其限制規範之具體明確有助於我國軍人依循，另外日本自衛隊法將政治性目的與政治性行為分別予以清楚規範而大幅縮小限制自衛隊隊員言論自由，亦值得我國借鏡。
The provisions of Article 138 of the Constitution, Article 139 of the Constitution, and Article 6 of the National Defense Law, are used as the legal basis for military administration and advocacy of neutrality. However, from the perspective of constitutionalism, is it appropriate to limit freedom of political speech for the military by the provisions in the Fundamental National Policies of Constitution? Article 6 of the National Defense Law, on the other hand, clearly shows that its legislative purpose is mainly to restrict the executive's forced propaganda of political beliefs in the military and to exempt the Subordinate soldiers from party control, that it is difficult to see the relevance of the legal explanation used to limit soldier's political comments. Under the current circumstances in which the relevant laws and regulations of the military administration neutrality are not clear, it is paradoxical to over-limit the rights of the soldiers themselves in political comments without clear rules. Therefore, it is the legal limit that this study focuses. This study also presents the legal and administrative orders in the United States regarding restrictions on the freedom of expression of military personnel, that will help to set a reference for our military to make concrete and specific restrictions on norms. Also, the Japan Self-Defense Forces Law clearly stipulates the political goals and political behaviors separately and drastically reduces restrictions on the freedom of expression of SDF members, that are also worth country to learn from. |
本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
