論身心障礙者權利公約第12條法律能力之憲法實踐－從歐洲經驗出發

Abstract

我國於2014年將聯合國身心障礙者權利公約納入法律體系，其中第12條依據CRPD委員會第1號一般性意見之詮釋，為實現輔助決定制，締約國不應剝奪障礙者之人格被法律平等承認之權利。我國現行民法監護制度（包括輔助宣告）之法律效果係對精神障礙或智能障礙者之法律能力為限制或剝奪，嚴重影響障礙者憲法權利之行使，屬於委員會所定義之替代決定制。對於公約義務之履行，本文關注的是，如何透過憲法解釋之方式調和公約與國內制度之落差，完成法律能力之憲法實踐。 對於公約實踐所涉及之監護議題，本文取逕歐洲經驗，藉由歐洲締約國之國家報告與委員會結論性意見，分析公約第12條在歐洲之履行現況以及國家對於法律能力之觀點；並介紹歐洲理事會之相關建議，梳理出作為歐洲共識之監護體系；最後，從歐洲人權法院在個案中對歐洲人權公約之解釋與適用，發現歐洲經驗與公約價值之落差。並在此基礎上，從三個面向對問題意識做出回應：首先，回應部分學說認為我國因未完成法定加入程序而不受國際法拘束之觀點，本文從「單方宣告」之國際法概念否認此看法，從而肯認我國負有履行公約之國際法義務；其次，對於「憲法實踐」之意義，本文從釋憲實務之分析，整理出CRPD得做為憲法解釋參考之結論，其意義在於透過憲法解釋之方式，確認「身心障礙者人格權」之憲法基礎，建構適於輔助決定制實現之法制環境；最後，透過CRPD第12條與歐洲經驗之輔助，以憲法第22條身心障礙者人格權作為審查基準，對民法監護制度與比例原則、正當法律程序與平等原則進行合憲性審查，從而得出違憲之結論，本文並提出三點建議作為日後修法參考。

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) has been incorporated into the Taiwan legal system since 2014, above all, article 12 of CRPD, according to General Comment No. 1 of CRPD Committee, in order to implement the supported decision-making, the states parties should refrain from any actions that deprives persons with disabilities of the right to equal recognition before the law. The legal effect of the commencement of guardianship under Civil Code of Taiwan, including the commencement of assistance, deprives or restricts the legal capacity of persons with mental disability or intellectual disability, intervening the exercise of the rights under Constitution of R.O.C., and thus belongs to the so called substitute decision-making as defined by the CRPD Committee. The topic of this thesis is to reconcile the gap between article 12 of CRPD and the domestic legal system through the constitutional interpretation to fulfill the constitutional implementation of legal capacity under CRPD. To discuss the implementation of CRPD concerning the guardianship system, the thesis starts from the European experiences, analyzes the implementation under article 12 of CRPD in European countries and their cognition to the legal capacity through the reports of European states parties and the concluding observations of CRPD Committee; introduces the recommendations of the Council of Europe as the common standard of European community; and finally, finds out the gap between the European experiences and the conventional value through the interpretation and the application of the European Court of Human Right on the European Convention on Human Rights. On the comparative ground, the thesis answers the topic in three dimensions: first, replying the cognition which argues that the Taiwan legal system is not subject to CRPD under international law, because the Taiwan government failed to accomplish the conventional accession procedure, the thesis denies the viewpoint by the notion of unilateral declaration under international law, and thus, the Taiwan government does have the conventional obligation to perform CRPD; second, to the meaning of the ‘‘constitutional implementation’’, the thesis analyzes the constitutional interpretations of Judicial Yuan, finds out that the international conventions may have the value of reference in practice, its significance is, through the constitutional interpretation, to confirm the constitutional foundation of the personality rights of persons with disabilities, and thus, to constitute the legal environment suitable for the implementation of supported decision-making; and last, with the cognition of article 12 of CRPD and the European experiences, the thesis examines the constitutionality of the guardianship system of Civil Code under the personality rights of persons with disabilities in article 22 of the R.O.C. Constitution with the principle of proportionality, due process of law, and the principle of equality, and finds out the conclusion on unconstitutionality, the thesis also provides three suggestions for the upcoming legal reform.