一○七年度第二十三屆法學論文得獎名單
第一名 / 林煜騰 / 憲法法院作為社會變遷的催化劑？-從釋字第365號解釋對我國女權發展之助力談起
| 姓 名 | 林煜騰 |
| 獎 項 | 第一名 |
| 學、經歷 | 哈佛法學院東亞法研究中心訪問學者 |
| 作 品 | 憲法法院作為社會變遷的催化劑？-從釋字第365號解釋對我國女權發展之助力談起作品摘要 |
| 作品摘要 | 法院的判決是否能夠帶動社會變遷一直是個爭論不休的問題。我國大法官在約莫20年前作成釋字第365解釋，認定舊民法第1089條有關親權行使之分配方式，違反平等原則違憲。本文以釋字第365號解釋為例，以羅森伯格的研究方法為基底，透過實證研究逐步探求大法官解釋是否有帶動社會變遷的功能。本文首先透過統計數據，觀察大法官解釋作成後台灣社會是否發生改變；其次，以教科書和政治、社會團體的活動，觀察大法官解釋與社會間的連結；最後，分析大法官解釋在司法和司法途徑外對社會變遷帶來的影響。本文發現，定期失效的解釋方法有助於大法官在當時的時空環境下突破法院固有的限制，並使其具備法院帶動社會變遷效能應有的條件，影響台灣社會之變遷。 Whether a judgment can lead social changes is always a controversial issue. The Constitutional Court of Taiwan has ever made J.Y No. 365 holding that the provision giving fathers right of final decision to disputes about exercising parental rights is unconstitutional. This paper employs J.Y No. 365 as an example to explore the influence of the Court on social change. Using empirical method, this paper revises the approach of Gerald N. Rosenberg’s research in “The Hollow Hope” to observer the relationship between J.Y No. 365and social change. Firstly, this paper observes whether there is social change in Taiwan after J.Y No. 365. Secondly, this paper investigates whether textbooks and activities of government and social groups relate with the concept of the constitutional decision after the judgment. Finally, this paper analyses the causal influence of J.Y No. 356 by judicial and extra-judicial paths. In conclusion, this paper finds that the Court overcame the three constraints and met certain conditions, so it could be effective producers of significant social reform. Imposing deadlines for compliance when the Court determines an Article as unconstitutional seems to play a role in this outcome. |
| 關鍵字 | 釋字第365號解釋、女權、社會變遷、定期失效、動力法庭論、有限法庭論、附條件有限法庭論、催化劑 Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 365, Women’s Right, Social C |