法的變動與信賴保護：法律理論的探索與重構

Abstract

本文觀察我國因為法制度變動所發生的信賴保護的爭議，不但透露保護標準模糊的問題，也透漏著台灣本土的脈絡因素。本文認為台灣所發生的法溯及的爭議，在問題的分析上必須分為兩個層次：其一是規範標準的問題，其二則是規範如何處理系統性轉型（systemic transition）的問題。 在規範標準的部份，向來規範論述，都是以「信賴」作為其論證的基礎，也就是「信賴保護原則」。以信賴作為論述基礎，如果過度的重視信賴的狀態（reliance），將無法提出解決問題的標準。向來信賴保護原則所注重的乃是課予被信賴者（也就是國家）一定的義務來保護人民，以樹立公權力行為的公信力。在法規變動的風險情境中，人民固然會信賴國家能夠擔負一定的任務，不過仔細思考「信賴」的意涵，會發現信賴是一個複雜的心理過程，其間所涉及的乃是「信賴者（人民）－評估中介（法規範）－被信賴者（國家）」之間的關係。 本文認為，規範在處理信賴的問題時，無法強迫信賴者受與信賴，亦無法強迫被信賴者成為值得信賴的標的，唯有透過樹立一定的制度作為評估的中介藉以形塑合理的信賴，並於事後加以保護。這在法規變動的爭議背景，即是必須建立一個具有可預測性的轉型政策（transition policy），以形塑人們合理的信賴，並且於事後提供保護。也唯有從決定信賴的心理流程中，法律才能以信賴作為論述的基礎，並且尋求其保護的標準。從這個觀點來看，固然國家行為必須具有公信力，但是法規範作為維持其公信力的制度設計，必須立基於人們的理性運作。因此，信賴保護此一原則不但具有事後保護信賴的意義，也已經具有事前提供預測因子的功能。而這樣的功能另一方面也將信賴保護的問題從事後法院的角度往前擴展到事前的政治部門，並且由此也才有可能尋求個人權利�國家義務與法院事後干預�政治部門裁量形成的界線。由此而言，所謂的轉型政策可以說在法規變動的背景下，憲法下權力機關間的一種動態運作。 上述的標準在一般的情形下固然具有客觀性。但是在台灣所發生的問題中，可以說是具有台灣本身更深層的脈絡因素。這也就點出了，系統性轉型這樣的問題固然可能以傳統法規變動或是溯及效力的問題形式出現，但是法規範在處理這些的問題必須要特別注意到法規變動背後所發生的系統性轉型的現象，而應該由絕對具有客觀性的價值論述轉向回復正義做為典範基礎。

The research attempts to provide a framework for analyzing and approaching the retroactive disputes in Taiwan. I argue that these problems can be solved by building up the clear transition policy and appropriate measures to deal with the systemic transition. My analysis proceeds by including four parts.

The first part focuses on the meaning and essence of the “reliance” from the perspective of psychology in order to clarify the core of the Protection of Reliance Interests Doctrine. I argue that “Reliance” can only be analyzed in the decision-making process of rational individuals rather than the objective state of individual reliance on the state. By transformation of meaning from reliance to anticipation, the doctrine of the reliance interest protection can be understood as an institution to manage the uncertainties of legal changes rather than to eliminate the progressive transition.

The second part focuses on the performance of tradition Reliance Base in the cases of retroactivity in recent years in Taiwan and discovers some ambiguity on the normative doctrine as well as the local context. In approaching the normative doctrine, this essay criticizes the tradition reasoning of the Protection of Reliance Interest Doctrine, which is called reliance base, and discovers the flaws in the set of operation.. The research material covers the legal practice, mainly Judicial Yuan Interpretations, and the legal theory.

The third part remodels the Reliance Interest Protection Doctrine on the Anticipation Base, which emphasizes the function of the rational decision-making and cooperation of public/private sector to manage the uncertainty of legal change. In this way, the focus can be brought from ex-post to ex-ante perspective and, therefore, it is possible to draw a line between human right/government intervention and state discretion/judicial review.

The fourth part tracks down some contextual problems hidden behind the doctrinal analysis in Taiwan locale and finds some dilemma of systemic transition. Although the disputes of systemic transition could take its shape as the retroactivity issues, the legal strategy must based on the unique value of restorative justice rather than the ordinary justice. In this part, I will provide some case study in Taiwan for example in support of building the neutral institution to handle the retroactive disputes during the systemic transition.