| 摘要: | 本文最主要的研究內容，在於嘗試重新理解與建構我國的憲政理論，並進而說明我國的憲政理論雖肇端於「議會」思想，但卻無建立「議會內閣制」(parliamentarism)的意圖。由於我國形成「民主憲政」的思想，乃肇端於清末倡言民權與立憲運動，清末政治菁英所主張的政治制度，便成為本文研究其背後之理論思想的起點。並且，本文將針對下列主題，做進一步的探討與分析。
第一，在過去的相關研究成果中，研究者均將中文裡的「議院」和「國會」等同視之，但這樣的看法卻過於簡化。基本上，清末以來所講的「議院」與「國會」，固然都是指立法機關，但「議院」最早應為「議政」機關的意思，而未必即為立法機關。並且，雖然兩者也都是「民權」機關，但使用「議院」與「國會」詞彙的不同，則意味在角色功能的期待，及性質與地位上均有所不同。
第二，清末形成的立憲思想或憲政觀，並不是追求當前所講「憲政」或「憲政主義」(constitutionalism)。本文經由分析梁啟超與孫中山等重要政治菁英的言論及思想，說明中文裡的「立憲政體」或「憲政」，實係指以開議院或國會為根本的政體而言。從而，也論證了我國制定憲法以實施「憲政」，並不具有「有限政府」、「制衡」(checks and balances)及「法治」(rule of law)的意圖。
第三，民國初年建構的「過渡憲政」，採取了所謂的「責任內閣制」，並係因防範袁世凱專制的可能，而為「因人設制」下的抉擇。同時，「責任內閣制」的確切涵義及其實踐，仍涉及了從中國傳統政治制度來理解。此外，民初實施國會制度的失敗，直接影響了孫中山的憲政觀念與制度規劃，並為我國日後無法形成「議會主治」(parliamentary sovereignty)的重要關鍵。
第四，孫中山的「訓政」思想，正反映出他對實現「民權」的議會制度，在角色功能上均有所保留。並且，孫中山提出的「權能區分」理論，乃針對國會的「權能合一」而做區分。事實上，孫中山提出「訓政」主張的原因，係因他所持的「民權」概念，實為積極為國貢獻的責任觀。此外，本文還論證了孫中山所講的「約法之治」，其實並不等同於「訓政」，並對其所規劃設計的憲政體制，另有新的理解與詮釋。
第五，從歷史新制度主義的途徑，探討我國做出憲政選擇時的原始意圖，說明我國憲政選擇與制度變遷路徑，其實已為歷史事件與政治文化所「鎖定」(lock in)。從「五五憲草」以迄現行憲法中的制度結構，若追溯其變遷的路徑，以及分析其設計的原意，則可說明我國憲政選擇的侷限，係因已廢除了世襲君主，而難以再採行「議會內閣制」。
第六，本文經由研究清末以來的政治菁英與政黨領袖，對「責任內閣制」、「議會內閣制」、「行政權—立法權」關係及總統角色的不同看法，除了勾勒出我國憲法中的政治理論外，還將參酌西方民主與制憲經驗，進而對於「議會內閣制」何以在中國難以實踐，提出本文的具體意見。
This study tries to understand and reconstruct the political theory of Chinese Constitutionalism, and further explains the reason why ‘Parliamentarism’ is hardly established. Because the thought of democratic constitution was formed in late Chin Dynasty, the political system proposed by elites in late Chin Dynasty became the starting point of this paper. This study was divided into seven chapters, whose topics follow the historical proceedings.
The first chapter, ‘Introduction’, tries to generally introduce the background, meaning, research question of this paper. It stresses the importance to adopt a Chinese culture-based approach, and describes the research methodology and analytical structure.
The second chapter, titled ‘Conceptual clarification for Yi-Yuan and Kuo-Huei’ (parliament), tries to analyze the meanings of ‘Yi-Yuan’ and ‘Kuo-Huei’ by linguistic analytical approach. It is obviously too oversimplied to consider Yi-Yuan as the same as Kuo-Huei in previous literature. Basically, there will be no big mistake to consider the above two terms as legislative organs. However, the original meaning of Yi-Yuan should be a government organ for discussion, rather than a legislative one. Therefore, the meanings of the two terms should be different.
The third chapter is ‘Establishing a Yi-Yuan or Kuo-Huei’s perspective of constitutionalism’. This chapter shows that the original meaning of ‘constitutional government’ or ‘constitutionalism’ is the basic system of how to assemble a meeting. Therefore, this chapter further points out that our Constitution does not include the intents of ‘limited government’, ‘checks and balances’ and ‘rule of law’.
The fourth chapter focuses on the topic of ‘The construction and practice of transitional Constitutional Government’. The research purpose of this chapter is to analyze the reasons that caused the legislative system failed. Besides, this study adopts a political historical approach to explain that the parliamentarism was to check and balance the power of a president. In the mean time, this paper will elaborate what role and function that the Kuo-Huei is expected to play, for whom it is responsible.
The fifth chapter is ‘Dr. Sun Yat-Sen’s Political Tutelage and Constitutional Planning’. This chapter emphasizes the core concept of Dr. Sun’s ‘people’s right’ which lies in people’s contribution to our country. Further, this chapter will explain how Dr. Sun understands constitution, and reconstruct the theory of ‘Division between Political Right and Governmental Power’ and ‘Five- Powers Constitution’.
The sixth chapter is ‘Limitation and constrain of our constitutional choices’. By adopting historical neo-institutionalism, the study tries to discuss the original intent of our constitutional choice. It further explains that the historical event and political culture have a lock-in effect which determines the constitutional choice and institutional change. This chapter will trace the development of the constitutions, explore the content of our constitutionalism and describe the political theory of the constitution. Due to the previous choice, it is difficult for us to choose ‘parliamentarism’ again.
The seventh chapter is conclusion. This paper proposes different points of view about parliamentarism, executive-legislative relationship, and the role of a president. Besides, this paper also discusses why it is hard to establish parliamentarism in China by reference to the western democratic and constitutional experiences. |
