從美國法上復興「不授權原則」之呼聲略論法規命令作為豁免資訊公開法源之適格性

A Study on the Appropriateness of Promulgating Rules for the Withholding of Agency Records by Referring to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Precedents Regarding the Nondelegation Doctrine

本文首先回顧美國法上法院在不同時期對「不授權原則」(non-delegation doctrine)解釋適用態度變遷的軌跡，對照臺灣釋憲實務就委任立法「授權明確性」原則的實踐，針對晚近美國法上復興「不授權原則」的呼聲，從「得否授權」以及「授權時應保留何種控制機制」等面向予以檢討，提出觀察與評估時立法授權此一議題應有的視角。其次，以上開總論上的討論成果為基礎，並比較各國資訊公開法制上豁免公開法源的規範模式後，本文認為我國「政府資訊公開法」第18條第1款規定，授權行政機關得以法規命令規定「應秘密之限制或禁止公開事項」，立法體例有欠妥適，並進一步提出兩種修正方向的建議，以作為我國未來修訂相關法制的參考。

To begin with, this article sets out the appropriate scope, application and systematic control toward the Congressional delegation, by referring to the U.S. Supreme Court’s precedents in regard to the non-delegation doctrine issues, along with a comparison ofthe relevant interpretations of the Taiwanese Constitutional Court (The Council of Grand Justices). In addition, by way of the foregoing review of the practice of the nondelegation doctrine and the comparison among other countries’ exemption clauses of The Freedom of Information Act, this article asserts that Article 18, Section 1, Paragraph 1 of the Taiwanese Freedom of Government Information Act which literally allows the agency to promulgate rules for the withholding of agency records is problematic and needs to be modified. And two different approaches for amending this clause are thus proposed.