2014-06-27

自由經濟和平龜山島

二○○八年中國國民黨政權以「拚經濟」作為選舉主軸,並設定亮麗的「六三三」作為具體指標。然而,台灣經濟並無當初馬政府承諾的卓越表現,再加上油電雙漲所牽動的萬物齊漲,導致台灣實質薪資反倒退至十六年前水準,小民百姓生活苦不堪言。

為何行政院選擇於二○一三年底才倉促推出自經區特別條例草案?其終極目標簡單而言不過四個字「以新代舊」,亦即拋出「自經區」作為新的振興經濟噱頭,藉此轉移昔日「六三三」等經濟政見跳票的難堪罷了。

行政院臉書「台灣好政點」近日推出自經區「果然好讚,快來搶答」活動,每天「正確答題」的前百名不僅可獲電子禮券,後續更將有平板電腦抽獎,引發外界浪費公帑質疑。

筆者實際進入作答,該遊戲當日的題目為「自經區的終極目標是?」至於答案部分只有官版標準答案「自由經濟島」,以及陪襯的「和平島」與「龜山島」等兩個明顯惡搞選項,並無筆者堅信正解的「以上皆非」選項。尤有甚者,行政院強迫參與民眾惟有勾選「學理錯誤」卻「政治正確」的官版正解,才能進一步取得禮券與抽獎資格。繳稅月份才剛過,看到寶貴的血汗納稅錢不但被如此虛擲,還被花在「自費洗腦」的政令宣導活動上頭。納稅人,你為什麼不生氣?

2014-06-09

Basic rights are not yet protected by Constitution

Article 16 of the 1789 French “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen” says that “[a] society in which the observance of the law is not assured, nor the separation of powers defined, has no constitution at all.”
This sentence clearly encapsulates the modern understanding of what a constitution should do.
In addition to containing many flaws in its treatment of the separation of powers and the establishment of proper checks and balances, Taiwan’s Constitution also contains many issues concerning the guarantee of human rights that have been waiting for many years to be addressed.
To be more specific, the Constitution is quite specific when it comes to the first generation of basic human rights — civil and political rights — but when it comes to the second-generation human rights — economic, social and cultural rights — it is out of step with the times.
Furthermore, the Constitution has nothing at all to say when it comes to the third generation of human rights that have been added since the 1970s — generally described as collective rights — or the establishment of a national human rights commission.
In addition to these rights, there are also such rights as the inviolability of human dignity, due legal process, privacy rights, the right of access to the media and the right to health.
These are all basic human rights that the Constitution does not address directly but they have been incidentally addressed by the Council of Grand Justices in its constitutional interpretations over the past dozen years.
Although these interpretations represent a great improvement, the fact that the Constitution has failed to adapt to changing times has meant that these precious human rights advances have not been included in the document.
On the contrary, people are forced to assemble a protection of these rights from examining parts of the Council of Grand Justices’ constitutional interpretations.
Such a backward legal system is not only a hindrance to building a public understanding and awareness of constitutional law, it also has a negative impact on the universal spread of human rights education.
To bring the level of human rights protection in the Constitution into line with international human rights instruments so that Taiwan can reach the same level as advanced democracies around the world, it is necessary to carry out a major amendment of the Constitution to deal with the shortfall of human rights in it.
On Tuesday last week, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), referring to an opinion poll by the National Development Council, said that mainstream public opinion did not agree with amending the Constitution.
However, a closer look at the 20 questions in the poll shows that the only question that was related to the human rights issue was the question of whether or not the age limit for the right to vote should be lowered from 20 to 18 years.
It is highly regrettable that the president would use an official poll lacking in credibility as a basis for an all out rejection of the possibility of expanding the list of human rights included in the Constitution.
Is the government’s policy pledge to “respect, protect and fulfill human rights” nothing but a political slogan aimed at deceiving the public?

Taipei Times/Editorials/2014-6-9
Translated by Perry Svensson

2014-06-05

人權大步倒著走

法國人權宣言第十六條楬櫫「權利之保障未臻確實,權力分立制度未予釐定之社會,不得謂為有憲法之社會」,明確指出近代意義憲法應有的內涵。現行憲法除了分權與制衡呈現諸多破綻外,於人權保障方面,亦早有年久失修情形。

析言之,現行憲法對第一代基本人權,亦即自由權的保障,固有相當著墨,但對於第二代基本人權,亦即社會權保障的關照,卻已跟時代脫節。更遑論一九七○年後增加的第三代基本人權乃至國家人權委員會的設置,現行憲法更是付之闕如。

再者,包括:人性尊嚴不可侵犯、正當法律程序、隱私權、媒體接近使用權、健康權等諸多憲法未明文規定的基本人權,在近十餘年來以司法院大法官解釋為契機,雖已有長足推進,惟反觀受限憲法遲未「與時俱進」影響,這些寶貴的人權進步成果始終未能在憲法條文裡忠實反映,人民僅能依靠查閱司法院解釋片段拼湊而得。如此法制落後現象,不僅有礙於人民形成憲法意識,亦不利於人權教育的普及推廣。為使憲法的人權保障程度能與國際人權公約切實接軌,並進而與世界民主先進國家並駕齊驅,現行憲法有關人權清單部分,的確有大幅翻修擴充的必要。

日前總統馬英九拿國發會的官方民調,宣稱主流民意都不贊成修憲云云。惟仔細觀察問卷裡的十二個提問,只有調降選舉權至十八歲部分與人權有關。總統拿這份公信力不足的官版民調,就想全盤否認擴充憲法人權清單的可能性,令人浩嘆。所謂「人權大步走」的施政理念,難道只是欺瞞人民的政治語言而已?