歐洲聯盟之輔助原則

The Principle of Subsidiarity in the European Union

10.7015/JEAS.200006.0001

王玉葉(Lydia Yu-Yeh Wang)

歐洲聯盟 ； 輔助原則 ； 民主赤字 ； 聯邦主義 ； 可裁判性 ； European Union ； the principle of subsidiarity ； democratic deficit ； federalism ； justiciability

歐美研究

30卷2期（2000 / 06 / 01）

1 - 30

繁體中文

歐洲聯盟之成立使歐洲統合進一步深化與廣化。隨著會員國移轉更多主權予歐洲共同體，而部長理事會議事程序引進更多條件多數決，使得不經全體會員國同意的議案亦能通過，其決議卻影響到廣大歐洲人民之經濟社會生活，會員國及其人民對權力不斷擴展的歐洲聯盟充滿疑慮，對統合速度加快不斷侵蝕會員國主權滿懷恐懼。歐洲聯盟為了維持共同體與會員國間的權力均衡，乃提出輔助原則作為權力分配之準則。本文首先探討輔助原則之意義與歷史淵源，並比較其與聯邦主義精神相符合之處，進而追索輔助原則如何引進歐洲聯盟體系內，在行政與立法程序如何適用。最後並探討輔助原則是否適合由法院裁判。

The establishment of the European Union has pushed forward the depth and width of European integration. Increasing amounts of Member States' sovereignty has been transferred to the European Community, and the Council of Ministers has adopted more procedures of qualified majority vote in its important decision-making processes. As a result, Member States and their citizens have become suspicious and have begun to fear the expansion of the power of the European Union. The principle of subsidiarity is concerned with distribution of power, in which tension between centralization and devolution of power has always been inherent. The principle was adopted within the European Community as a mechanism to mediate the division of power between the Community and Member States, and try to defuse political conflict. The aim of this paper is to examine the development of the principle within the European Union system. It probes the meaning and historical background of the principle, its relationship with federalism, and its practical application and influence in the political system. The paper also assesses the justiciability of the principle within the European judicial system.

1. 洪德欽 Horng, Der-Chin(1999)。歐元之法律分析 Legal Aspects of the Euro。歐美研究 EurAmerica，29(2)
   連結：
2. (1994).Basic Community Laws.
3. Alcock, Alistair(1992).Subsidiarity and Adverse Possession.New L. J.,142
4. Anderson, Skein S., Eliassen, Kjell A.(1996).The European Union: How Democratic is It?.London:Sage Publications.
5. Belmort European Policy Centre(1991).From Luxembourg to Maastricht: 100 Critical Days for Europe 50.Brussels:
6. Bermann, George A.(1995).European Community Law from a U. S. Perspective.Tul. J. Int'l ＆ Comp. L.,4
7. Bignami, Francesca E.(1999).The Democratic Deficit in European Community Rulemaking: A Call for Notice and Comment in Comitology.Harvard International Law Journal,40
8. Breyer, Stephen(1999).Does Federalism Make a Difference?.P. L.
9. Cass, Deborah Z.(1992).The Word that Saves Maastricht? The Principle of Subsidiarity and the Division of Powers within The European Community.Common Market Law Review,29(5)
10. Centre for Economic Policy Research(1993).Making Sense of Subsidiarity: How Much Centralization for Europe?.
11. Dubinsky, Paul(1994).The Essential Function of Federal Courts: The European Union and the United States Compared.Am. J. Comp. L.,42
12. Edwards, Denis J.(1996).Fearing Federalism's Failure: Subsidiarity in the European Union.Am. J. Comp. L.,44
13. Emiliou, Nicholas(1992).Subsidiarity: An Effective Barrier Against 'the Enterprises of Ambition?'.European Law Review,17
14. Fisher, Thomas C.(1995).Subsidiarity as a Brake on European Union.
15. Gretschmann, Klaus(1991).Subsidiarity: the Challenge of Change.Maastricht:European Institute of Public Administration.
16. Hosli, Medeleine O.(1995).ECSA Conference.
17. Jochimsen, Reimut(1991).Subsidiarity: The Challenge of Change.Maastricht:European Institute of Public Administration.
18. Jones, Jackie(1997).The Committee of the Regions, Subsidiarity and a Warring.European Law Review,22
19. Partan, Daniel G.(1995).The State of the European Union: Building a European Policy?.
20. Pope Pius XI(1936).Quadragesimo Anno.London:Catholic Truth Society.
21. Santer, Jacques(1991).Subsidiarity: The Challenge of Change.Maastricht:European Institute of Public Administration.
22. Swaine, E. T.(2000).Subsidiarity and Self-Interest: Federalism at the European Court of Justice.Harvard International Law Journal,41
23. Toth, A. G.(1994).Is Subsidiarity Justiciable?.European Law Review,19
24. Toth, A. G.(1992).The Principle of Subsidiarity in the Maastricht Treaty.Common Market Law Review,29
25. Vause, W. Gary(1995).The Subsidiarity Principle in European Union Law - American Federalism Compared.Case W. Res. J. Int'l L.,27
26. 王玉葉 Wang, Lydia Yu-Yeb(1998)。歐洲聯盟：理論與政策。台北:中央研究院歐美研究所。
27. 王泰銓 Wang, Dominique T. C.(1997)。歐洲共同體法總論。台北:三民書局。
28. 王鶴(1993)。評歐共體的輔助性原則。歐洲，11(2)
29. 吳東野 Wu, Tung-Yeh(1994)。歐洲聯盟條約「輔助原則」條款之理論分析。問題與研究 Wenti Yu Yanjiu，33(11)
30. 洪德欽 Horng, Der-Chin(1998)。歐洲聯盟：理論與政策。台北:中央研究院歐美研究所。
31. 張亞中 Chang, Ya-Chung(1998)。歐洲統合：政府間主義與超國家主義的互動。台北:揚智。
32. 陳慈陽 Chen, Tsi-Yang(1999)。「地方自治與行治法學」學術研討會。
33. 蒲魯東(1863).Du principe federatif et la necessite de reconstituer le parti de la revolution.

1. 洪德欽(2007)。歐盟憲法之法理分析。歐美研究，37(2)，255-321。
2. 焦興鎧(2021)。歐洲聯盟對抗工作場所霸凌問題之努力：回顧與前瞻。歐美研究，51(1)，159-209。
3. 訐琇媛(2005)。歐盟憲法條約探討歐盟與會員國間之權限劃分。歐洲國際評論，1，65-102。
4. 廖福特(2001)。人權宣言？人權法典？—「歐洲聯盟基本權利憲章」之分析。歐美研究，31(4)，689-751。
5. 林昕璇,左宜恩(2022)。例外與常態的悖論－美國與我國因應COVID-19緊急法制之比較研究。臺灣民主季刊，19(2)，79-134。
6. 劉文仕(2006)。從歐盟成員國地方治理的發展經驗解構1996-2005臺灣地方制度改革的兩大迷思。臺灣民主季刊，3(3)，35-84。
7. 王玉葉(2007)。歐洲人權法院審理原則—國家裁量餘地原則。歐美研究，37(3)，485-511。
8. 徐揮彥(2008)。從歐盟文化政策之發展與實踐論文化權之保障：以文化多樣性為中心。歐美研究，38(4)，671-751。
9. (2004)。西班牙區域主義發展及其影響。淡江人文社會學刊，18，79-99。