適時且正當的聽證程序─以重大建設開發流程為中心

Abstract

大法官釋字第709號解釋，首次以憲法上的正當行政程序要求舉行聽證，然而從桃園航空城案可以看到，重大建設開發流程當中聽證程序之建制，仍有相當多的爭議。因此，本文首先探討聽證程序在憲法上的基礎及其判斷方式，再藉由比較法的觀察整理出不同聽證型態，並就各個程序要素進行分析，最後聚焦於重大建設開發流程，建構其適時且正當的聽證程序。 就聽證之憲法基礎而言，我國釋憲實務仍未有將正當行政程序權利化的跡象，而僅能作為其他權利受侵害時附帶審查之客觀規範；在判斷標準方面也因採取綜合判斷模式，而流於恣意。不過大法官釋字第709號解釋正巧反映正當法律程序的特殊之處，因程序之不同而有多元的表現方式，唯有探究程序之功能與目的，並對不同的聽證程序單元分析探究後，才能判斷正當程序之何在。 具體而言，本文在參考美、德二國之聯邦行政程序法後，將聽證的主要型態分為權利保障型與決策參與型。至於其程序單元則又可分為聽證機關與主持人、聽證程序當事人、預先告知與資訊揭露、聽證程序之拘束力四大部分。不同程序的功能與目的，都會影響到這四個程序單元的設計。 在結合聽證主要型態、程序單元個別分析，以及重大建設開發流程本身的三項特色後，本文認為建設計畫階段在於廣泛聽取意見，屬於決策參與型，由計畫機關舉行聽證並將意見反映到計畫中。用地取得階段直接影響人民權利，為權利保障型，強調主持人之公正獨立性。土地利用階段，屬權利保障偏決策參與之中間型態，應由屬於決策機關的地方政府舉行聽證，及在早期參與先期解決部分爭點的機制調和下，踐行準司法程序型之聽證程序。

This thesis is aimed at developing the framework that addresses the due process of the hearing for major construction developments. After reviewing the Judicial Yuan Interpretations and exploring the nature of hearing, this thesis categorizes the hearings into two models and elaborates a proper way to design significant factors of the hearing. With an approach of the comparative legal study on the administrative law in the jurisdictions of the United States and Germany, this thesis focuses its main theme on the major construction developments. Previously the due process of administration was not deemed as a constitutional right, and its vague standard led the judgement to be arbitrary, when identifying the due process of hearing. Nevertheless, the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 709 breaks the deadlock and articulates that the due process of hearing can be identified, only when the main purpose and all significant factors of the process are included into the consideration. More specifically, by reviewing the comparative practices, the author concludes two models of the hearing — the right-protecting model and the participation-in-decision-making model, which outline the main purpose of the hearing. The main purpose further forms as the basis in designing the significant factors of the hearing, which are highlighted in this thesis as: “the hosting agency of the hearing and the host”, “participants”, “the advance notice and the disclosure of information”, and “the binding effect of the hearing”. The finding of this research holds the hearing of construction project aligning with the participation-in-decision-making model, since its purpose is to hear the public opinion generally; to conduct hearing focusing on the fairness and independence of the host; and that the hearing of land-use should conduct quasi-judicial process by local government.