| 摘要: | 自1949年以來的歲月裡，台海之兩岸關係一直是世人關心的議題，它的一舉一動牽動到與太平洋地區諸國家間的互動，亦常影響東亞地區國家的穩定性，1958年8月23日起並長期在金門、廈門間砲戰，至1979年1月1日方休，大陸全國人大並發表告台灣同胞書，兩岸間方逐漸解凍，台灣並於1987年11月2日開放探親，民間交流遂由地下浮上檯面，11月3日，大批台灣人民赴大陸探親，正式結束了兩岸長期隔絕的歷史。原籍常州的台胞周純娟成為首位獲得大陸入境證件的台灣人民。1988年11月9日，台灣有條件開放大陸人民赴台探親、奔喪。1989年5月，大陸國務院批准設立臺商投資區。1992年6月10日，台灣開放大陸工業成品入島，同年10月24日開放首批158項服務業赴大陸投資項目。民間既產生交流，產生私人間之法律關係即難於避免。臺商至大陸經商，亦多有妻小滯留大陸，所產生之婚姻糾紛，更是層出不窮，來台人員亦同，如釋字第242號對鄧元貞離婚訴訟案所為之解釋即是，且因有包二奶等致產生非婚生子女。
兩岸間因大陸實施一國兩制之結果，港、澳在回歸中共之後，成為大陸之兩個特別行政區，惟臺、港、澳間之交流，應適用「香港澳門關係條例」（1997年4月2日總統公佈），並無「臺灣地區與大陸地區人民關係條例」（以下簡稱本條例或兩岸條例）之適用；至於兩岸三地間有二套法律衝突法之衝突，例如兩岸之人民於香港或澳門結婚，究應適用「香港澳門關係條例」或本條例？又如臺、港人民於大陸地區發生侵權行為之損害賠償，究應適用侵權行為地法或損害發生地法？二條例均有不同之規定，且兩岸條例係採區際法律衝突之法則，港澳條例則「類推適用」涉外民事法律適用法，於理論上似有本末倒置，宜改以兩岸間「準用」涉外民事法律適用法，臺港、臺澳間則採一國數法處理較切合實際。至於外蒙，因時間上之因素，於憲法制定前，基於「中蘇友好同盟條約」，已於1946年2月13日承認其獨立，1947年行憲後，依憲法第四條規定「依其固有疆域」之結果，應不含外蒙才是，雖我國於1953年2月23日廢止「中蘇友好同盟條約」，但於國際法上，除非外蒙消滅，並非得隨意撤銷承認，故就法論法，外蒙現階段應是獨立之國家，已非中華民國之領土，雖本條例施行細則第3條於民國91年1月30日修正前原條文仍將之列入大陸地區之範圍內（現該條已不含外蒙古地區），大法官釋字第328號亦不解釋其違憲，但其應已為獨立之國家。
本論文「臺海兩岸親子間法律問題之研究」，嘗試對兩岸交流後產生之親子間法律問題加以探討，透過蒐集、分析及比較研究等方式，以更加瞭解兩岸間就所生之親子間法律問題，加以研究，並就子女之受教育權利、認領、收養、父母子女關係、監護、扶養、繼承等探討之，對論及民事判決之承認與執行，期能對兩岸之交流有所貢獻，並探求兩岸間親子法律問題根本解決之道。
Since 1949, Cross-Strait relations had always been a major concerned issue of many; its every action had great impacts over pacific nations, as well as affecting stability in southeast Asia countries. The tension then led to military actions; began on August 23, 1958. Taiwan and China engaged in a long period of artillery bombardment of Kinmen and Xiamen, and ended on January 1, 1979. The tension began to thaw when National People's Congress (NPC) Standing Committee issued a "Message to Compatriots in Taiwan" and Taiwan allowed its people to visit relatives in mainland China starting on November 2, 1987, further allowing non-governmental exchanges. On November 3, 1987, swarms of Taiwanese visited their relatives in China, and ended the long period of isolation across the strait. Chun-Chuan Chou, who was originally from Changzhou, was the first Taiwanese to acquire a Chinese visa. On November 9, 1988, Taiwan conditionally allowed Chinese citizens to visit relatives in Taiwan and attend funerals. In May, 1989, the State Council of China established the Taiwanese Investment Zone. On June 10, 1992, Taiwan allowed Chinese industrial products to enter Taiwan, and on October 24 of the same year Taiwan allowed the first batch of 158 service industries to make investments in China. Following the interactions between people across the strait, legal issues were inevitable, such as when Taiwanese businessmen brought along their family to China, many marital issues emerged, and vice versa. For example, J.Y. Interpretation NO. 242 explained Teng Yuan-Chen's divorce lawsuit as such, and other matters include having illegitimate children with the mistress.
Under the adoption of One Country, Two Systems policy, after the Transfer of sovereignty over Hong Kong and Macau, those two areas became the Special Administrative Region of China. The interactions between Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macau were under the “Laws and Regulations Regarding Hong Kong & Macao Affairs (announced by the President on April 2, 1997)”, not the “Act Governing Relations Between The People Of The Taiwan Area And The Mainland Area (Regulations across strait)”. Since there are two legislation systems, they are conflicted. For example, should the “Laws and Regulations Regarding Hong Kong & Macao Affairs” or “Regulations across strait” be enforced when people from across the strait get married in Hong Kong or Macau? Or which is better suitable to apply, “lex loci delicti conmmissi” or “Law of the Place of Damages”, when citizens from Taiwan or Hong Kong engaged infringement in China? Those two regulations have different rules; Regulations across strait adopted interregional conflict laws, and Laws and Regulations Regarding Hong Kong & Macao Affairs adopted analogy application of Law Governing the Application of Laws to Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements. In theory, they are not inefficient, it would be better to modify to Applicable Mutatis Mutandis of Law Governing the Application of Laws to Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements, and between Taiwan-Hong Kong and Taiwan-Macau, it would be more reasonable to use One Country, Several Legislations. Outer Mongolia was not suitable for those regulations because it announced independent before the establishment of constitution, and protected by the “Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Alliance.” Its independence was recognized on February 13, 1946, and in 1947, Constitution Article 4 stated that “Outer Mongolia posses territories”, and even though “Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship and Alliance” was repealed on February 23, 1953, yet according to International Law, unless Outer Mongolia was eliminated, it would stay independent and be recognized as so. Before the amendment of Act 3, Article 4 on January 30, 2002, it was stated that Outer Mongolia still belonged to Chinese territories. (the act now excluded Outer Mongolia) J.Y. Interpretation NO. 328 that the amendment wasn't unconstitutional, yet Outer Mongolia was indeed an independent country.
The present paper focus on “Legal Issues on Parents-Children Relationship Exist between Taiwan and Mainland China,” and by using the methods of data gathering, analyzing, and comparing to discuss parent-child legal issues after Cross-Strait interactions, and to have a better understanding on children of Taiwanese and Chinese parents, their right for education, adoption, to foster, family relationships, custody, Maintenance, and inheritance, while discussing on the mutual acknowledgment and execution of civil verdict, and solutions to legal issues of Cross-Strait parents and their children, in hopes to make contributions on bettering communications across the strait. |
