再探議會程序瑕疵──以「明顯重大瑕疵」作為司法權介入審查要件為核心

Parliamentary Procedural Flaws: Major and Clear Erroneousness as Judicial Power Intervene in the Examination of Legislative Power

明顯重大瑕疵，此要件作為司法權審查立法程序的標準，為我國司法院第342號解釋確立，不論在日後的司法實務或者學說討論中，此要件本身並未受到質疑。然而從立法史與法律體系的分析中，該要件具有強烈法安定性之色彩，並不能全面處理憲法層面上的行為，又因這項特質遭受忽略，使人人解釋適用或學術討論時以各自自身價值帶入，而有重新修正的必要。對此，日本學說中曾批評國會「強行表決」所產生的亂象，提出國會正常化的呼籲。在此一爭論之中，多數決原理與議會主義成為主要的論點所在。以此為借鏡，可分析出在採取議會主義的前提下，多數決原理的濫用即為議會程序瑕疵的本質。而重大明顯瑕疵作為司法權介入審查議會程序的要件，並無法彰顯議會瑕疵的本質，應重新修正此一要件為判斷是否有多數決濫用之情形。

Major and clear erroneousness is a standard for judicial power to intervene in legislative power which established by J.Y. Interpretations No. 342. This standard has not been questioned by judicial practice or doctrine discussion. From the analysis of legislative history and system, this standard has the characteristics of strong law stability and can not fully handle the behavior at the constitutional level. This makes people discuss their own value to judge, so there is a need for amendment. In this regard, the Japanese doctrine has criticized Congress “forced to vote” generated the chaos and the call for the normalization of Congress. In the debate, the majority principle and parliamentarism became the main argument. After adopting parliamentarism, the abuse of the majority principle is the essence of parliamentary procedural flaws. Major and clear erroneousness does not reveal the essence of parliamentary flaws and should be amendment to determine whether there is a majority of abuse.