議會內閣制之比較──以英國與日本為例

A Comparison of Parliamentary Cabinet Systems in Britain and Japan

顏筠展(Yun-Chan Yen)

議會內閣制 ； 日本憲法 ； 一黨內閣 ； Parliamentary Cabinet System ； Japanese Constitution ； One-Party Cabinet

台日法政研究

8期（2022 / 12 / 01）

115 - 145

繁體中文;英文

議會內閣制起源於英國且被世界多數民主國家所採用；日本於二戰戰敗後，1947年頒布的日本憲法，以人民主權取代君主主權，天皇遂成為無害的國家象徵，即君王統而不治。英日兩國的憲政制度，皆蘊含議會內閣制精神，但兩國仍有差異。議會內閣制的組成型態可分為一黨內閣和聯合內閣，本文挑選英日兩國係因兩國的議會在多數時期皆為一黨內閣。再者，英日兩國的議會內閣制在實務運作上究竟為何、又有哪些相同相異之處？本文使用文獻分析法和比較法，比較英日兩國議會內閣制之相同相異處，並於結論回頭省視臺灣目前的憲政體制，不論政壇人士或學者皆有人提議應全面走向議會內閣制，此主張是否可行且能否如英日取得經長年運作議會內閣制下之良好成果，進行討論。

The parliamentary cabinet system originated in the United Kingdom and has been adopted by most democracies in the world; after Japan's defeat in World War II, the Japanese constitution promulgated in 1947 replaced the sovereignty of the monarchy with the sovereignty of the people, and the emperor became a harmless national symbol, that is, the monarch ruled without rule. The constitutional systems of Britain and Japan both contain the spirit of the parliamentary cabinet system, but there are still differences between the two countries. The composition of the parliamentary cabinet system can be divided into one-party cabinets and coalition cabinets. This paper selects Britain and Japan because the parliaments of both countries are one-party cabinets in most periods. Furthermore, what are the similarities and differences in the practical operation of the parliamentary cabinet systems of the UK and Japan? This paper uses the literature analysis method and the comparative method to compare the similarities and differences between the parliamentary cabinet systems of the UK and Japan. And at the conclusion, I look back at Taiwan's current constitutional system. Whether politicians or scholars, some people propose to move to a parliamentary cabinet system totally. Whether this proposal is feasible and whether it can achieve good results under the parliamentary cabinet system after years of operation in the UK and Japan will be discussed.

1. 李明峻(2019)。日本象徵天皇制下的意願內閣制刻意被弱化的制度設計。各國憲政體制選擇
   連結：
2. 蘇子喬(2013)。兼容並蓄或拼裝上路？—從內閣制與總統制優劣辯論檢視半總統制的利弊。臺灣民主季刊，10(4)，1-48。
   連結：
3. 蘇子喬,劉嘉薇(2022)。國會選制與憲政體制對國會選舉投票率的影響—內閣制與總統制民主國家的跨國分析。臺灣民主季刊，19(1)，1-39。
   連結：
4. 內閣制議題學者看法不一，https://www.chinatimes.com/realtime-news/20141215004247-260407?chdtv，最後瀏覽日期：2022/10/27。
5. 台灣有必要改採內閣制嗎？ https://www.fountmedia.io/article/2961，最後瀏覽日期：2022/10/28。
6. 老賊在英國，http://www.mzfxw.com/e/action/ShowInfo.php?classid=18&id=93092，最後瀏覽日期：2022/7/16。
7. 各界對雙首長制、內閣制的看法與建議（上），https://tw.news.yahoo.com/035000717.html，最後瀏覽日期：2022/10/27。
8. 台灣沒條件實施內閣制嗎？https://hk.on.cc/tw/bkn/cnt/commentary/20150405/bkntw-20150405000421132-0405_04411_001.html，最後瀏覽日期：2022/10/27。
9. 改成內閣制會比較好嗎？葉爾欽的例子告訴你，亂改對台灣絕對沒好處，https://www.storm.mg/lifestyle/353151?page=5，最後瀏覽日期：2022/10/26。
10. Cheibub, Jose Antonio,Elkins, Zachary,Ginsburg, Tom(2013).Beyond Presidentialism and Parliamentarism.British Journal of Political Science,44(3),515-544.
11. Duchacek, Ivo D.(1973).Power Maps: Comparative Politics of Constitutions.Santa Barbara:ABC-Clio Press.
12. Frye, Timothy(2002).Presidents, Parliaments, and Democracy: Insights from the Post-Communist World.The Architecture of Democracy: Constitutional Design, Conflict Management, and Democracy,Oxford:
13. Fukuyama, Francis,Dressel, Björn,Chang, Boo-Seung(2005).Facing the Perils of Presidentialism?.Journal of Democracy,16(2),102-116.
14. Hellwing, Timothy,Samuels, David(2007).Electoral Accountability and the Variety of Democratic Regimes.British Journal of Political Science,38(1),65-90.
15. Heywood, Andrew(2000).Key Concepts in Politics.New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
16. Kavanagh, Dennis(1995).Changes in Electoral Behavior and the Party System.British Government and Politics since 1945: Changes in Perspective,Oxford:
17. Kawabata, E.(2008).Reforming the Bureaucracy.Democratic reform in Japan : assessing the impact
18. Lijphart, Arend(1984).Democracies: Patterns of Majoritarian and Consensus Government in Twenty-One Countries.New Haven:Yale University Press.
19. Lijphart, Arend(2004).Constitutional Design for Divided Societies.Journal of Democracy,15(2),96-109.
20. Linz, Juan J.(1994).Presidential and Parliamentary Democracies: Does It Make a Difference?.The Failure of Presidential Democracy: Comparative Perspectives,Baltimore:
21. Mainwaring, Scott,Scully, Timothy R.(1995).Introduction: Party Systems in Latin America.Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America,Stanford, CA:
22. Norris, Pippa(2008).Driving Democracy: Do Power-Sharing Institutions Works?.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
23. Poguntake, Thomas(2005).The Presidentialization of Politics.Oxford:Oxford University Press.
24. Sartori, Giovanni(1994).Comparative Constitutional Engineering: An Inquiry into Structure, Incentives and Outcomes.New York:New York University Press.
25. Shugart, Soberg Matthew,Carey, John M.(1992).President and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
26. Stepan, Afred,Skach, Cindy(1993).Constitutional Frameworks and Democratic Consolidation: Parliamentarianism versus Presidentialism.World Politics,46(1),1-22.
27. Verney, Douglas V.(1970).The Analysis of Political Systems.Abingdon:Routledge.
28. 王業立,蘇子喬,石鵬翔(2018).台、日、韓憲政體制與選舉制度.五南.
29. 李國雄(2016).比較政府與政治.三民.
30. 施正鋒（編）(2019)。各國憲政體制選擇
31. 徐泓(2000)。英國國歌不只一首。暨大電子雜誌，6，1。
32. 高橋和之(1994)。国民内閣制の理念と運用。有斐閣。
33. 蘇子喬(2021).中華民國憲法憲政體制的原理與實際.三民.