Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title: ||選區劃分之理論與實踐 : 以立法委員選舉為例|
|Other Titles: ||The theory and practice of electoral district delimitation : a case study of legislator election in Taiwan|
|Authors: ||林亮宇;Lin, Liang-yu|
|Keywords: ||立法委員;選區;選區劃分;傑利蠑螈;複數選區不可讓渡投票制;單一選區二票制;公告;Legislator;Electoral District;Electoral District Delimitation;Gerrymandering;Single Non-Transferable Vote- Multi Member District (SNTV-MMD);Single Member Districts System and Two Votes System;Proclamations|
|Issue Date: ||2010-01-11 04:46:38 (UTC+8)|
Since the Constitution is executed, the electoral method of legislator has passed through several changes. In the Additional Articles of the Constitution passed in 2005, the local representatives are selected among the same size of electoral district by dividing the elected quota. In the Amendment of the Constitution, it does not stipulate explicitly on how to divide such a same volume of electoral district. Is the Election And Recall Law remodeled and published on 3rd February, 2006 appropriate? If the citizens do not satisfied with the result, is there any way to remedy? If there is a way, what kind of remedy we should follow?Regarding this question, we start to discuss from the correlation element of electoral district, including Suffrage and Voting right, System of Election and the allocation of seat, the meaning of electoral district and the standard dividing, the origination of dividing election district and Gerrymandering. We will go down to the system of election for legislator and relevant problem of dividing electoral district in around year 2005. If disagreeing with dividing result of electoral district, you can try to construct a completed remedy system and propose remodeling the regulation.
We found 1. The revolution of electoral system did not succeed because the rationality of administrative divisions is not considered. 2. The regulation of electoral system in the Additional Articles of the Constitution is still open to discussion. 3. The ratio and seat allocation of political party is not calculated accurately, the ratio of possible and gained seat may have big difference. 4. If the foreign residents are excluded from the representative selected according to the ratio of political party, the regulation for foreign residents is not meaningful any more. 5. Standard of electoral district delimitation is not regulated by law, causing the un-compulsory of current division standard; it does not differentiate the different of first division and re-division. 6. The uncompleted regulation of the remedy for disagreement of the electoral district delimitation result; if the citizens refuse to accept it, so many problems will occur.
We propose below suggestion in regards with so many questions: 1. The first execution of SNTV-MMD. Electoral district delimitation should take the equivalence of population as the priority standard. 2. Cooperating with Executive Yuan census-taking every ten years; regulating 10-year as a circle of time for re-division of electoral district. 3. In the election proclamation, we should regulate that the political party or candidate participated in the election within the electoral district can propose Administrative proceedings toward the contents of proclamation. 4. We should establish an origination specifically responsible for electoral district delimitation, whose member should be approved by parliament. 5. We should consider that if the administrative division should be re-adjust or at least considering breaking through the division method based on county and city. 6. We should create a new regulation, which is to design an extraordinary procedure of lawsuit, and the lawsuit are proposed by citizens disagree with electoral district delimitation.
|Appears in Collections:||[公共行政學系暨研究所] 學位論文|
All items in 機構典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.