從釋字第728號解釋談已制定施行法的國際人權公約的憲法解釋問題

The Role of the Enforcement Law of International Human Rights Treaties on Constitutional Interpretation: The Case of J.Y. Interpretation No. 728

本文擬以釋字第728號解釋為例，探討已制定施行法的國際人權公約於憲法解釋的角色定位問題。釋字第728號解釋的主要爭點為祭祀公業條例派下員及派下權相關規定是否違反平等原則，該解釋雖於理由書中提到其造成實質上的差別待遇但最終結論仍不違憲。此一解釋遭受學說意見批評的其中一點即是該解釋理由書中提到參酌消除對婦女一切形式歧視公約，然解釋結果仍基於尊重私法自治與結社自由為合憲。本文所欲探討者便是國際人權公約於我國憲法解釋的角色為何？其是否僅作為比較法的觀點？本文認為已制定施行法的國際人權公約於憲法解釋應有不同的角色定位，大法官應至少有義務參酌國際人權公約而為解釋。

This article intends to clarify the role of the Enforcement Law of International Human Rights Treaties on constitutional interpretation through taking Constitutional Interpretation No.728 as an example. The controversial point of the Interpretation No.728 is whether the succession qualification in Statutes Governing Ancestor Worship Guilds violates the principle of equality. The reasoning supplement of the Interpretation No.728 claims that despite the difference in entity of equal was identified but it is still constitutional. One of the statements criticize the No.728 for the advocacy of the principle of the autonomy of private and the principle of freedom of association; nevertheless, Interpretation No.728 has mentioned the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. This article concludes that the Taiwanese Constitutional Court is obliged to taking the International Human Rights Treaties as a reference during interpretation.