| 中文摘要 |
"司法院大法官於2013年7月31日，經大法官會議做成司法院釋字第711號解釋，對於藥師法第11條規定：「藥師執業處所應以一處為限。」未於有重大公益或緊急情況之需要時設必要合理之例外規定，已對藥師執行職業自由形成不必要之限制，有違憲法第15條保障工作權與第23條比例原則之意旨相牴觸。藥師法第11條之立法目的為推行藥師專任之政策及防止租借牌照營業之不法情事，藥師係以藥學專門知識技能，核對醫師開立之處方以調配藥劑，並為病患提供正確藥物資訊、諮詢與藥事照護等服務，此一限制，乃出於確保醫藥分業制度之完善、維護人民用藥安全等公共利益之考量。在完善醫藥分業制度之公益目的上，限制一處執業是否成為欲達此目的之最小侵害手段而無違憲之虞？本篇論文藉由了解釋字第711號解釋作為問題之出發點，以憲法保障人民基本權之規範與法律對職業自由限制為基礎上，進而研究在立法政策與公益目的上探討於醫藥分業、推行藥師專任、防杜租借牌照營業等公益與有關於法律對職業自由之限制在憲法第23條架構下之比例原則、三階段理論、平等原則之合憲性審查下，了解法律限制人民職業自由內容與違憲問題。
Pharmacists shall practice at only one location by article 11 of Pharmacists Act before amending the law. Justice of the Constitutional Court held this article infringes the right of pharmacists’ freedom of Occupation without reasonable exceptions by Interpretation No.711. Pharmacists with specialized knowledge and skills to check physicians’ prescriptions in order to dispense and provide the correct information on drug counseling, pharmaceutical care and other services to patients. For the purpose of the legislation in this article is with to prevent illegally using license and make pharmacists’ full-time work at one location to ensure the separation of dispensing practice from medicine practice(SPMP) and safety of drug use. Therefore, this article starts with the protection of professional rights and legal liability for pharmacists, followed by discussions on freedom of occupation. The discussion will then be further developed into the principle of proportionality, the principle of equality and Three-level theory. In order to prevent illegally using license and make pharmacists’ full-time work at one location to ensure the separation of dispensing practice from medicine practice(SPMP) and safety of drug use is discussed. Furthermore, this article brings forward the principles for setting specific regulations, aiming to serve as references for pharmacists for their law amendment proposals and fight for their interests in the future." |
本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
