法治國原則與立法程序

Rule of Law Principles and Legislative Procedures

本文旨在探究法治國原則如何作為調控立法程序之標準。立法程序向以民主政治、政黨政治為運作根據，但漸朝向提升立法品質與實現方法發展。本此先釐清立法裁量概念的雙重屬性，敘明實踐缺失與憲法上程序原則，以示與民主原則的差異。再從比較法學與脈絡調控的觀點，兼為闡釋憲法第23條與第171條的本旨，提出理性立法與良善立法之目標，作為評價立法程序正確性之基準。
是以宜從後設取向重構立法程序之規範，從憲法最高性與立法程序自主性為基調。為建構相應的憲法框架，形式上採脈絡調控，從決策主體與其程序、內容、對象間的互涉作用構成。實質上框架則取基本權利對於立法程序的作用為例，針對開啟、進行與終結三種形態加以說明。
立法程序的違憲審查，不限於重大瑕疵；還包括正確掌握基本權利保障範圍、不法侵害概念與立法事實間相互關係。如能合理調查事實、維護體系正義原則，適足以確保立法品質的良善。

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the appropriateness of the rule of law principle as a reason for regulating the legislative process and the formulation of its strategies. This paper first clarifies the dual nature of the concept of legislative discretion and addresses the lack of practice and the relevant constitutional procedural principles to highlight the differences with democratic principles. Drawing on comparative law to explain the purpose of Articles 171 and 23 of the Constitution Article of the Constitution, we propose the goal of rational and good legislation as the basis for evaluating the correctness of the legislative process.
In this regard, we should re-structure our normative strategy from a posteriori thinking, based on the supremacy of the Constitution and the autonomy of the legislative process. Additionally, the process should be regulated to serve its function and inherent value. To construct a corresponding constitutional framework, the author advances both the formal and substantive levels. The formal framework of the legislative process is a network of regulation, which is constituted by the interrelationship between the body, content, and object of the process. The substantive framework of the legislative process, however, takes the role of fundamental rights in the legislative process as an example, divides the process into opening, proceeding, and ending, and discusses the differentiation between fundamental rights to illustrate their role before and after legislative decision-making activities.
To implement the principle of the rule of law, the system of unconstitutional review plays a crucial role. However, review of the legislative process should not be limited to major defects, as in the current case. By referring to German practice, we can correctly grasp the scope of fundamental rights protection, the relationship between wrongful infringement and legislative facts, the procedural requirements of reasonable fact-finding, and the maintenance of the principle of systemic justice, to properly regulate the legislative process constitutionally and ensure the good quality of legislation.