| 摘要: | 公民投票具有直接民權的概念，是落實主權在民的一種直接民主方式，可以彌補代議政治的不足，提昇人民的政治參與。然而長久以來公民投票這個議題，在台灣內部卻蘊藏著大量的政治因素，包含著歷史意涵與政治理念。所以本文採用「歷史制度主義」的觀點，作為理論分析的依據，回顧先前的歷史遺緒對公投制度發展的影響，延續至公投法立法過程的變遷；將公民投票先就理念主張的起源、付諸行為的狀況以及法制化的過程，作為研究的主軸來貫穿全文。本論文共分為六個章節，除緒論外，其提要概述如下：
第二章探討公民投票與民主理論：在現行代議民主政治的運作下，產生了種種的弊端問題，促使公民投票制度的興起，藉此討論公民投票制度與直接民主理論基礎的關聯。
第三章描述公民投票主張在台灣的歷史與實踐經驗：這部分將溯及到1947年廖文毅對台灣地位問題意見開始論述，次而對1970至1980年代公民投票與台灣地位的問題作探討，依其歷史演進至1990年代台灣公民投票案例：後勁反五輕、貢寮反核四以及台中反拜耳等等之政策議題，藉此分析我國公民投票制度的起源，論述台灣公民投票的歷史軌跡和演進階段，從制度變遷的軌跡中，分析我國公民投票法制化的政治意涵。
第四章探討我國公民投票法之第一階段立法過程（1993-1995年）：探討公投法草案一開始提案審議階段的立法意旨和政治考量，整理委員會審查過程、政黨爭議的焦點以及社會政策變遷的影響因素，以歷史制度主義的核心概念審視第一階段公投法制化的結果。
第五章探討我國公民投票法之第二階段立法過程（2002-2003年），也就是我國公民投票法完成三讀立法的情形。針對此階段探討制度變遷的經過，分析內外環境的脈絡，以及各項重大偶發因素的影響結果。
最後結論部分：本文透過歷史制度主義的觀點分析，發現我國公民投票理念的發展，深受憲政規範的制約歷史遺緒的影響；面對政治環境的轉變有利於公民投票法制化的成形，但關鍵性的路徑轉折卻是非預期的偶發因素－2004年總統選戰的策略考量。
Plebiscite contains a concept of civil rights. It is a form of direct democracy that realizes “sovereignty belonging to the people”, which compensates the deficiency of the Representative Politics, as well as promotes the citizens’ participation in politics. However, the issue of referendum, owing to the huge political factors embedded inside Taiwan, has long comprised historical meaning and political ideas. This paper, therefore, adopts the perspective of “Historical Institutionalism” as the basis of theoretical analysis, which reviews the impact made by previous historical discussions on plebiscite institution. The paper then stretches to the change of the process of the legalization of plebiscite. The main idea of the study will begin with the origin of the concept and assertion of plebiscite, the state of implementation, and the process of legalization. There are six chapters in this thesis, aside from introduction, which are briefly listed as the following.
Chapter II looks into theories of plebiscite and democracy. Under the operation of modern representative democracy, a variety of drawbacks and problems have occurred, which stimulate the rise of the institution of plebiscite. Furthermore, this chapter discusses the relationship between plebiscite and the basis of the theory of direct democracy.
Chapter III describes the history and experiences of plebiscite in Taiwan. This part can be traced back to 1947, when Wen-Yi Liao (廖文毅) stated about the problems of Taiwan’s position. Sequentially we will look into the referendum and the position of Taiwan in the decade between 1970 and 1980. The cases of Taiwan’s plebiscite in 1990s, according to historical development, are political issues including the anti-No.5 Naphtha movement in Hou-chin, the Stop-Construction-of- Nuclear-Plant-No.4 movement in Koong-liao, and the anti-Bayer movement in Taichung. Through these cases we can analyze the origin of the institution of plebiscite in Taiwan and depict the historical course and revolutionary stages of Taiwan’s plebiscite, from which we can examine the political implication of the legalization of plebiscite in Taiwan.
Chapter VI surveys the process of legalization of plebiscite at the first stage (1993-1995). This part examines the legal meaning and political consideration in proposing the draft of plebiscite laws at the beginning. With the core concept of Historical Institutionalism in mind, we will look into the result of the legalization of plebiscite at the first stage thorough the arrangement of the committee’s process in examination, focus of arguments between political parties, and factors such as social changes.
Chapter V investigates the process of legalization of plebiscite at the second stage (2002-2003). This is also about the completion of legalization of plebiscite in Taiwan, when the Legislative Yuan three reads through it. This chapter, focusing on this stage, will discuss the process of the changes of institutions, and analyze the context of both interior and exterior environments, as well as the impacts of individual important accidental occurrences.
At the conclusion, we uncover, from the perspective of Historical Institutionalism, that the development of the plebiscite ideas in Taiwan are deeply influenced by conditioned historical thoughts, which are regulated by norms of a constitutional government. We underwent a change in the political environment that is in favor of the formation of the legalization of plebiscite, while the critical turning point was an unanticipated, accidental factor – a strategic consideration of the presidential election in 2004. |
