總統是為國家元首，但是在不同憲政制度下的總統，其職權就有著極大的不同。在總統制與內閣制中，總統所擁有的職權較為明確，但半總統制下的總統，由於並未有明確的典範來參考，因而在與國會及總理之間的互動上，不斷出現權力的角力，在衝突中尋求相互妥協之道，並磨合出屬於該國的特色。 立陶宛與波蘭這兩個具有相似的歷史背景的國家，1980年代末期的東歐民主化潮流後，分別制定了兩種不同概念的半總統制憲法。在近幾年的憲政發展之下，兩國卻又不約而同地朝向強勢總統的方向發展。而此時，兩國憲法的規定是否能夠阻擋此一趨勢，以保持總統與總理及國會三者之間的權力平衡，實可以做為我國未來憲政體制發展的借鏡。 本文的研究主要是在於總統職權的憲法現實規定之上，而非以研究半總統制理論為基礎，所以在有關於半總統制的各種理論並未給予深入的比較，但仍藉由這兩國總統權力的比較，分析半總統制可能出現的問題以及了解何為半總統制。 本篇論文共分為六章。第一章為緒論，敘述整篇論文的研究動機及目的和整篇研究限定的範圍，並概述半總統制的理論發展。第二章先簡介立陶宛與波蘭兩國的國情概況，並介紹兩國自史前時代至今的歷史以及兩國的民主概況。第三章則為分析總統專屬的憲政職權。第四章是以總統與行政權之間的互動下的相關憲政職權為比較範圍。第五章則是覆議與解散國會這兩種與國會相關的職權行使上的比較。第三、四、五章除了兩國之間的憲法與實例上的比較之外，主要在於分析憲政制度的設計，以便能更清楚的理解這兩國為何要在憲法中做如此規定。第六章為結論，在當中除了總結前面各章的問題外，筆者更提出對立陶宛與波蘭以及半總統制的看法，以希望我國在憲政改革之際，除了仿效先進民主國家之外，更能以其他有著相似問題的國家作為參考。 Lithuania and Poland share almost the same historical experiences. The two countries were originally united, but now separated in differ in their constitutions. The constitutional power of the president in Lithuania is close to presidentialism, but Poland is close to parlimentialism. Despite the differences, in political science, both are categorized as semi-presidentialism.
After a decade of democratization, these countries are now highly developed. Both joined the EU in 2004, thus it will be difficult to revert to monocracy. However, in recent years, the presidents for these two countries are developing more power than ever. So it will be quite interesting to research how the presidents can respond to their respective constitutions and to find out what kind of power should the presidents have in the semi-presidentialism regime.
There are six chapters in this thesis. The first chapter will first outline why and how I conducted this research, and a brief introduction about semi-presidentialism. The second chapter will highlight the two countries today, followed with an introduction regarding the history of the two countries. The third chapter will compare the presidents'' monopoly powers. The fourth chapter will compare the powers of the president and the cabinet. The fifth chapter will compare the powers of the president and the national assembly. Finally, the last chapter is to make a conclusion about this thesis and try to find out how would the semi-presidentialism look like.
