我國憲法國家軍事主權限制條項的法制史與釋義學之開展──立憲和平主義憲法學的省察

The Legal Hermeneutics and the Legal History of the Article 137 of Constitution of the Republic of China: A View from Constitutional Pacifism

自近代立憲主義發跡以來，對於國家戰爭與軍事權力之立憲統制便一直是憲法學之一重要課題。二戰以後多數國家之憲法皆定有與軍事或和平有關之條項，我國憲法第137條第1項即規定我國「之國防，以保衛國家安全，維護世界和平為目的」。本文將我國憲法第137條第1項定性為「國家軍事主權限制條項」，並對於我國「國家軍事主權限制條項」之演變進行法制史之考察。本文分析指出，我國之「國家軍事主權限制條項」可分為戰前的「國內中央政府軍權行使限制型」與戰後的「國際和平條項型」二種。此外，本文亦對於我國憲法第137條第1項之釋義學進行學說分析與檢討。本文研究後指出，我國憲法第137條第1項之解釋可分為方針條款說、海外派兵授權規定說、限制軍事權力說、規範不明論等類型。最後，本文從立憲和平主義憲法學之角度出發，提出「專守防衛」說之解釋論，以在文義解釋之範圍內最大限度無害化國家戰爭與軍事權力。

Since the beginning of modern constitutionalism, the constitutional control of state war and military power has always been an important subject of constitutional law. After World War Ⅱ, lots of states have a written constitution with the rules of military power or peace. According to the article 137 of Constitution of the Republic of China, the national defense of Taiwan shall have as its objective the safeguarding of national security and the preservation of world peace. In this study, the article 137 is defined as the restriction of military sovereign power. This study examined the restrictions of military sovereign power in Chinese constitution in history, and suggested that before WWⅡ, the restrictions of military sovereign power were focused on internal control of the central government’s military power, and after the war, the restriction of military sovereign power became a provision about international peace. According to this study, the legal hermeneutics of the article 137 can be divided into four theories, which suggest respectively that the article is i) simply a noncompulsory clause; ii) an authorization that allows the state to send the national force to foreign countries and join the war; iii) an article that aims at being a restriction of military sovereign power; iv) ambiguous in it’s meaning and should be amended. Finally, in view of Constitutional Pacifism, this study suggested a new theory of the article 137 which is called exclusively defense-oriented theory. According to the theory, the article 137 is a restriction that only allows the state to exercise the right of individual self-defense, denying the right of collective self-defense and the keeping of offensive weapon.