政黨體系與新興半總統制國家的共治運作

Party System and Cohabitation in Nascent Semi-presidential Countries

10.6284/NPUSTHSSR.202003_14(1).4

張峻豪(Chun-Hao Chang)

半總統制 ； 共治 ； 政黨體系 ； 國會 ； Party System ； Cohabitation ； Semi-presidential Countries ； Congress

人文社會科學研究

14卷1期（2020 / 03 / 17）

59 - 78

繁體中文

共治乃總統與總理來自不同政黨（或聯盟），且總統所屬政黨（或聯盟）不在內閣組成當中，因此，在府會不一致下，共治將基於「總統、國會多數與內閣組成多數一致」、「總統、國會聯盟、聯合政府」的兩種樣態，體現政黨體系在其中的重要影響。於1990年代加入半總統制陣營的新興民主國家中，政黨體系的相對不穩定，是許多國家共同存在之現象，而在這些新興半總統制國家中，多黨制的政黨體系更是伴隨共治出現，並影響其共治運作的關鍵，基此，本文將選擇10個新興半總統制國家，比較其政黨體系與共治的關連性。首先，本文將藉國會有效政黨數的計算，展現相異政黨體系所形成的共治樣態，將共治再分類；其次，本文將國會的政黨體系延伸至其對政府運作與存續之影響，討論共治期間的政府組成以及內閣存續天數和政黨體系的關係。最後，本文將藉各國政黨體系影響下的共治運作案例，說明政黨體系的樣態及其零碎性是否實質影響憲政運作之穩定。本文認為，在政黨體系的因素外，仍應考量政黨聯盟的緊密性、總理角色、總統憲政權力，以及一國制度是否固著等因素，因此，政黨體系的穩固並非一定帶來半總統制便因共治而轉向內閣制的軌道，同樣地，政黨體系的零碎性也不必然會帶來半總統制國家在共治期間的不穩定性。

By centering on political party systems, this paper aggregates the effective numbers of parties and patterns of majority formation which assays the connectedness of political party coalitions with the executives and the parliaments in newly semi-presidential countries. Theorists often concentrate on the cohabitations of the interactive relations of the executive powers between presidents and prime ministers but less often refer to the relations through which presidents and prime ministers respectively interact with governing coalitions (the executives) and parliamentary coalitions (the legislatures). Hence, on examining the situations in which newly semi-presidential countries frequently form coalition governments under multiparty systems, this thesis promotes that the factors of the party influence of presidents, the executive orientation of prime ministers, or the competition and cooperation of parliamentary coalitions and of the executives, and so on, will complicate the patterns of cohabitation operation. Therefore, this paper investigates the party systems to examine the triangle relations among the presidents, the prime ministers and the parliaments, through which the types of cohabitation can be scrutinized. This thesis gathered materials in ten countries and investigated profoundly and thoroughly these countries' cohabitation experiences. This paper will also make comparisons of political party systems during the cohabitations, and see how the political party systems deepen or convert the implications, and embody the ＂formation＂ and the ＂shift＂ of cohabitations in these newly semi-presidential countries.

1. 沈有忠(2004)。半總統制下的權力集散與政府穩定：臺灣與威瑪共和的比較。臺灣民主季刊，1(3)，99-129。
   連結：
2. 沈有忠(2013)。保加利亞「議會化半總統制憲法」的設計與運作。政治科學論叢，58，17-46。
   連結：
3. 林繼文(2009)。共治可能成為半總統制的憲政慣例嗎？法國與臺灣的比較。東吳政治學報，27(1)，1-51。
   連結：
4. 張峻豪(2015)。新興半總統制國家的共治經驗與路徑多樣性。東吳政治學報，33(2)，121-185。
   連結：
5. 張峻豪(2011)。半總統制運作類型的跨國研究。問題與研究，50(2)，107-142。
   連結：
6. 陳宏銘(2007)。臺灣半總統制下少數政府的存續：2000-2004。東吳政治學報，25(4)，1-64。
   連結：
7. Georgia: Conflict Rather than Cohabitation (2013). Retrieved September 7, 2019, from Eurasianet, Website: http://www.eurasianet.org/node/66527
8. Elgie, Robert(2008).Semi-Presidentialism: An Increasingly Common Constitutional Choice.Semi-Presidentialism and Democracy: Institutional Choice, Performance, and Evolution
9. Elgie, Robert (2013). Presidential Power. Retrieved September 7, 2019, Website: http://presidential-power.com/?p=1716
10. Elgie, Robert(2010).Semi-presidentialism, Cohabitation and the Collapse of Electoral Democracies, 1990-2008.Government and Opposition,45(1),29-49.
11. Elgie, Robert (2009). The Semipresidential One. Retrieved September 7, 2019, Website: http://www.semipresidentialism.com/?cat=118
12. Elgie, Robert(Ed.),Moestrup, Sophia(Ed.)(2012).Semi-presidentialism in Central and Eastern Europe.New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
13. Elgie, Robert,McMenamin, Iain(2011).Explaining the Onset of Cohabitation under Semi-presidentialism.Political Studies,59(3),616-635.
14. Gherghina, Sergiu,Miscoiu, Sergiu(2013).The Failure of Cohabitation: Explaining the 2007 and 2012 Institutional Crises in Romania.East European Politics and Societies,27(4),668-684.
15. Kirschke, Linda(2007).Semipresidentialism and the Perils of Power-Sharing in Neopatrimonial States.Comparative Political Studies,40(11),1372-1394.
16. Kolarova,Spirova(2011).Bulgaria.European Journal of Political Research,50,922-928.
17. Kopecky, Petr(2008).Political Parties and the State in Post-Communist Europe.New York:Routledge Press.
18. Krupavicius, A.(2004).Lithuania.European Journal of Political Research,43,1059-1069.
19. Leuffen, Dirk(2009).Does Cohabitation Matter? French European Policy-Making in the Context of Divided Government.West European Politics,32(6),1140-1160.
20. Lewis, Paul G.(Ed.)(2001).Party Development and Democratic Change in Post-Communist Europe.London:Frank Cass Press.
21. Linz, Juan,Stepan, Alfred(1996).Problems of Democratic Transition and Consolidation: SouthernEurope, South America, and Post-Communist Europe.Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press.
22. Malová, D.,Učeň, P.(2007).Slovakia.European Journal of Political Research,46,1096-1106.
23. Myers, Steven (2004). Lithuanian Parliament Removes Country's President After Casting Votes on Three Charges. Retrieved April 7, 2018, from The New York Times,Website: https://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/07/world/lithuanian-parliament-removes-country-s-president-after-casting-votes-three.html
24. Pettai, Vello,Kreuzer, Marcus(1998).Party Politics in the Baltic States: Social Bases and Institutional Context.East European Politics and Societies,13(1),148-189.
25. Protsyk, Oleh(2006).Intra-Executive Competition between President and Prime Minister: Patterns of Institutional Conflict and Cooperation under Semi-presidentialism.Political Studies,56(2),219-244.
26. Sedelius, Thomas,Ekman, Joakim(2010).Intra-executive Conflict and Cabinet Instability: Effect of Semi-presidentialism in Central and Eastern Europe.Government and Opposition,45(4),505-530.
27. Shugart, Mathew,Carey, John(1992).Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
28. Skach, Cindy(2007).The "newest" separation of powers: Semipresidentialism.International Constitution,5(1),93-121.
29. Taagepera, Rein,Shugart, Matthew(1989).Seats and Votes: The Effects and Determinants of Electoral Systems.New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.
30. Tsai, Jung-hsiang(2008).Sub-types of Semi-presidentialism and Political Deadlock.French Politics,6(1),63-84.
31. Brian Whitmore (2013). Georgia’s Changing Russia Policy. Retrieved September 7, 2019, from Radio Free Europe, Website: http://www.rferl.org/content/georgia-russia-foreign-policy-ivanishvili-saakashvili/24971738.html
32. Wu, Yu-Shan(1999).Taiwan’s Constitutional Framework and Cross-Straits Relations.1999 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association,Atlanta:
33. 王洪一(2013)。非洲政黨政治的新特點和新趨勢。當代世界，12，60-63。
34. 吳玉山(2002)。半總統制下的內閣組成與政治穩定──比較俄羅斯、波蘭與中華民國。俄羅斯學報，2，229-265。
35. 呂炳寬,徐正戎(2005).半總統制的理論與實務.臺北:鼎茂出版社.
36. 林繼文（編）(2000).政治制度.臺北:中央研究院中山人文社會科學研究所.
37. 洪茂雄(2003)。,臺北:行政院國家科學委員會。
38. 胡祖慶(1996)。政治制度與政治穩定：以後冷戰時期的東歐為例。問題與研究，35(7)，73-82。
39. 張峻豪(2016).共治類型與新興半總統制國家的憲政經驗.臺北:翰蘆圖書.
40. 張珮瑩 （2019）。〈保加利亞政經概況〉。貿易俱樂部， 網址：https://www.eximclub.com.tw/innerContent.aspx?Type=Publish&ID=3787&Continen=3&Country=%E4%BF%9D%E5%8A%A0%E5%88%A9%E4%BA%9E。點閱日期：2019 年12 月1 日。
41. 簡赫琳(2009)。高雄，國立中山大學政治學研究所。

1. (2022)。半總統制之「擺盪」描述概念的再思考—從物理特徵、字詞使用及次類型轉換的困難談起。正修通識教育學報，19，1-20。