公民投票及其隱含之人民概念

Referendum and Its Implied Concept of the People

李俊增(Chuin-Zeng Lee)

公投 ； 一元性格 ； 同質性人民概念 ； 協和式民主 ； 包容性人民概念 ； referendum ； unitary character ； concept of a homogeneous people ； consociational regime ； concept of a people of inclusion

高大法學論叢

11卷2期（2016 / 03 / 01）

193 - 197+199-273

繁體中文

本文首先指出不同意義之公投一元、排他性格以及其背後隱含預設之相應的同質性人民概念；並進一步強調，公投之一元性格與隱含之相應的同質性人民理念，使得公投在民主國家之運作可能造成多數壓迫少數之結果，形成多數暴政。在獨裁國家，公投民主更因此質變為「直接訴諸人民認可之民主」，甚至淪為對獨裁者喝采之工具。。藉此討論，本文希望能與瑞士之公投相關制度及其運作所蘊含展現之意義形成明顯對照。按瑞士雖然是由多元種族、語言、宗教等組成的國家，但卻由於，存在一為「協和式融合與互惠共生」之精神與文化所聯結凝聚的包容性人民概念，瑞士公投之一元、排他性格因此為之淡化。瑞士之公投甚少造成少數權利受壓制的結果；反之，公投經常成為少數表達其價值、利益，並藉此迫使政府妥協、讓步之工具，甚至是促成瑞士協和式權力共享體系的重要機制。多元種族、語言之瑞士顯示了直接民主可能成為一整合的力量。直接民主機制可以說是解釋瑞士穩定民主之一項重要因素。

This paper shows that referenda have some different kinds of unitary, exclusive characters which impliedly presuppose corresponding homogeneous concepts of a people. Therefore, the use of referenda is more likely to lead to the tyranny of the majourity and harm the civil rights of minority groups. Autocratic rulers even turn referendum democracy into plebiscitarian democracy or use referenda as devices of acclamation for themselves. By contrast, the Swiss, composed of sufficient diverse societal groupings (race, language, religion, etc.), are a people of inclusion united by a culture of ＂consociational integration and mutualism＂ that's deeply rooted in his history. The Swiss embrace diversity of various sorts of groupings. In Switzerland, minorities are not only tolerated. They are favored. The existence of such a people of inclusion has important effects on the use of referenda. Referenda's unitary, exclusive characters are moderated in Switzerland. Popular votes were seldomly used to curtail the rights or the status of minorities. Minority groups even usually exploit referenda to express their voices and compel the government to compromise its policies. Moreover, Switzerland's consociational regime has been partly shaped by minority's exploitations of referenda. Multilingual Switzerland seems (still) to prove that direct democracy is integrative force. Indeed, Direct-democracy instruments are one important factor explaining Switzerland's stable democracy.

1. 廖揆祥(2004)。公民投票在德國各級政治體系之發展。台灣政治學刊，8(2)，51-120。
   連結：
2. Baker, Keith Michael(1990).INVENTING THE FRENCH REVOLUTION: ESSAYS ON FRENCH POLITICAL CULTURE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
3. Barber, Benjamin(1988).Participation and Swiss Democracy.Government and Opposition,23(1),31-50.
4. Barber, Benjamin(1974).THE DEATH OF COMMUNAL LIBERTY-A HISTORY OF FREEDOM IN A SWISS MOUNTAIN CANTON.Princeton:Princeton University Press.
5. Bogdanor, Vernon(1981).THE PEOPLE AND THE PARTY SYSTEM: THE REFERENDUM AND ELECTORAL REFORM IN BRITISH POLITICS.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
6. Bogdanor, Vernon(1988).Federalism in Switzerland.GOVERNMENT AND OPPOSITION,23(1),69-90.
7. Bondanella, Julia Gonaway(ed.)(1988).ROUSSEAU'S POLITICAL WRITINGS.New York:W.W.W. Norton & Company.
8. Bulter, David(ed.),Ranney, Austin(ed.)(1994).REFERENDUMS AROUND THE WORLD.Washington D.C.:The AEI Press.
9. Bulter, David(ed.),Ranney, Austin(ed.)(1978).REFERENDUM: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PRACTICE AND THEORY.Washington, D.C.:A.E.I..
10. Bulter, David(ed.),Ranney, Austin(ed.)(1994).REFERENDUM AROUND THE WORLD.Washington, D.C.:The AEI Press.
11. Cain, Bruce E.(1992).The Varying Impact of Legislative Term Limits.Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association,Chicago:
12. Craig, Stephen(ed.)(1996).BROKEN CONTRACT.Boulder:Westview Press.
13. Donovan, Todd(ed.),Bowler, Shaun(ed.),Tolbert, Caroline J.(ed.)(1988).CITIZENS AS LEGISLATORS.Columbus:Ohio State University Press.
14. Dorfman, Gerald A.(ed.),Duignan, Peter J.(ed.)(1988).POLITICS IN WESTERN EUROPE.Stanford:Hoover Institute Press.
15. Fossedal, Gregory A.(2002).DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN SWITZERLAND.New Brunswick:Transaction Publishers.
16. Gamble, Barbara S.(1997).Putting Civil Rights to a Popular Vote.AMERICAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE,91,245-69.
17. Hampson, Norman(1983).WILL & CIRCUMSTANCE: MONTESQUIEU, ROUSSEAU AND THE FRENCH REVOLUTION.Norman:University of Oklahoma Press.
18. Hampson, Norman(1988).THE LIFE AND OPINIONS OF MAXIMILIEN ROBESPIERRE.Oxford:Basil Blackwell Ltd.
19. Hofstadter, Richard(1955).THE AGE OF REFORM.New York:Vintage Books.
20. Hunt, Lynn(1984).POLITICS, CULTURE, AND CLASS IN THE FRENCH REVOLUTION.Berkeley:University of California Press.
21. Kobach, Kris W.(1993).THE REFERENDUM: DIRECT DEMOCRACY IN SWITZERLAND.Aldershot:Dartmouth.
22. Lewis, Daniel C.(2013).DIRECT DEMOCRCY AND MINORITY RIGHTS: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THE TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY IN THE AMERICAN STATES.New York:Routledge.
23. Lijpart, Arend(1984).DEMOCRACY: PATTERNS OF MAJORITARIAN AND CONCENSUS GOVERNMENT IN TWENTY-ONE COUNTRIES.New Haven:Yale University Press.
24. Linder, Wolf(1994).SWISS DEMOCRACY-POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO CONFLICT IN MULTICULTURAL SOCIETIES.New York:St. Martin's Press.
25. Lucas, Colin(ed.)(1988).THE FRENCH REVOLUTION AND THE CREATION OF MODERN POLITICAL CULTURE, Vol. II.Oxford:Pergamon.
26. Magleby, David. B.(1984).DIRECT LEGISLATION: VOTING ON BALLOT PROPOSITIONS IN THE UNITED STATES.Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press.
27. Marxer, Wilfried(ed.)(2012).DIRECT DEMOCRACY AND MINORITIES.Wiesbaden:Springer VS.
28. McKenna, George(ed.)(1974).AMERICAN POPULISM.New York:Capricon Books.
29. Qvortrup, Matt(ed.)(2014).REFERENDUMS AROUND THE WORLD: THE CONTINUED GROWTH OF DIRECT DEMOCRACY.Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan.
30. Sa'adah, Anne(1990).THE SHAPING OF LIBERAL POLITICS IN REVOLUTIONARY FRANCE-A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE.Princeton:Princeton University.
31. Sartori, Giovanni(1987).THE THEORY OF DEMOCRACY REVISITED.Chatham:Chatham House Publishers, Inc..
32. Schmid, Carol L.(1981).CONFLICT AND CONSENSUS IN SWITZERLAND.Berkeley:University of California Press.
33. Schmitt, Carl,Kennedy, Ellen(trans.)(1985).THE CRISIS OF PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACY.Cambridge:The MIT Press.
34. Schmitt, Carl,Schwab, George(trans.)(1976).THE CONCEPT OF THE POLITICAL.New Jersey:Rutgers University Press.
35. Schmitt, Carl,Seitzer, Jeffrey(trans.)(2004).LEGALITY AND LEGITIMACY.Dunham:Duke University Press.
36. Schmitt, Carl、北洋太郎譯(1989)。憲法の番人。東京:第一法規出版株式會社。
37. Schmitt, Carl、尾吹善人譯(1982)。憲法理論。東京:創文社。
38. Setälä, Maija(ed.),Schiller, Theo(ed.)(2009).REFERENDUMS AND REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY: RESPONSIVENESS, ACCOUNTABILITY AND DELIBERATION.New York:Routledge.
39. Staszewski, Glan(2003).Rejecting the Myth of Popular Sovereignty and Applying an Agency Model to Direct Democracy.Vanderbilt Law Review,56,395-494.
40. Steinberg, Jonathan(1996).WHY SWITZERLAND?.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
41. Steiner, Jürg(1974).AMICABLE AGREEMENT VERSUS MAJORITY RULE: CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN SWITZERLAND.Chapel Hill:University of North Carolina Press.
42. Talmon, Jacob L.(1970).THE ORIGINS OF TOTALITARIAN DEMOCRACY.New York:The Norton Library.
43. Watkins, F.(ed.)(1986).ROUSSEAU'S POLITICAL WRITINGS.Madison:The University of Wisconsin Press.
44. 小林武(1989)。現代スイス憲法。東京:法律文化社。
45. 吳志光(2002)。公民投票與司法審查。輔仁法學，24，1-26。
46. 吳志光(2000)。論公民投票訴訟之基本問題。憲政時代，26(1)，80-102。
47. 蕭高彥(1998)。行政院國科會整合計劃成果報告行政院國科會整合計劃成果報告,行政院國科會=National Science Council。
48. 辻村みよ子(1990)。フランス革命の憲法原理：近代憲法とジャコバン主義。東京:日本評論社。

1. 李坤城(2020)。你投的是「擁核」還是「廢核」？從關聯性分析初探「以核養綠」公投通過的原因。中國行政評論，26(2)，1-25。
2. 楊尚儒(2020)。Carl Schmitt論公投及其限制：關於直接民主對代議制之挑戰所做的警告。台灣政治學刊，24(1)，109-161。
3. (2019)。公民投票提案的合憲性審查── 以比較法的觀察及我國法制的檢討為核心。憲政時代，45(1)，1-42。