論自我執行規範作為規制之手段－－以疫情時的危機處理為例

Self-executing Norm as a Measure of Regulation - An Analysis of Crisis Management during a Pandemic

COVID-19疫情自2019年末爆發以來，我國立法者除制定COVID-19特別條例以為應對外，三年來就涉及防疫法律工具之職權規定則未有任何調整。與此相對，德國傳染病防治法不僅歷經多次修正，其中更於2021年4月以不待行政機關具體化規範內容，即直接拘束受規制對象的自我執行規範作為防疫手段。然此舉卻引發是否牴觸權力分立及訴訟權保障之爭議，惟同年德國聯邦憲法法院迅速作成裁判肯定其合憲性。鑑於防疫上之規範規劃需求，本文乃於考察正反不同之學理意見，以及德國聯邦憲法法院上揭裁判後，試就自我執行規範得作為危機時刻的處理應對手段提出評估與建議。

Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic at the end of 2019, the legislators in Taiwan have made scarce adjustments to the provisions concerning“legal tools”in response to epidemics, with the exception of enacting a special COVID-19 regulation. In contrast, the Infection Protection Act of Germany has undergone multiple revisions, including the revised version in April 2021. It directly limited the self-executing norms of regulated entities without waiting for specific administrative measures. However, this revised Infection Protection Act engendered controversies regarding to the separation of powers and protection of the right to litigation. Nevertheless, the German Federal Constitutional Court promptly ruled in favor of its constitutionality in the same year. To address needs of regulatory planning in epidemic response, this article examines various perspectives on the advantages and disadvantages of the approach. Additionally, it explores whether these self-executing norms can be considered as crisis management measures and provides assessments and recommendations.