政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/118980
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113451/144438 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51245572      線上人數 : 916
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/118980


    題名: 從政黨輪替探討大法官意見表達行為之變化
    The effects of power transition on constitutional court justices’ dissent behavior
    作者: 鄭琹尹
    Cheng, Chin-Yin
    貢獻者: 黃紀
    鄭琹尹
    Cheng, Chin-Yin
    關鍵詞: 政黨輪替
    大法官意見表達
    統獨立場
    負二項迴歸模型
    二層有序勝算對數模型
    日期: 2018
    上傳時間: 2018-07-27 12:36:29 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 大法官的司法決策行為影響國家、社會甚鉅，執政者與司法部門的互動則長期以來都是公眾關注的焦點。因此本文聚焦於我國大法官釋憲時的意見表達行為，以大法官的意見書為分析標的。討論政黨輪替前後，大法官的意見表達行為是否產生變化，以及統獨意識形態、提名總統及其任期、交錯任期等因素，對大法官意見表達行為的影響。

    結合過往學理，本文指出當政黨競爭程度激烈時，執政者出於選舉失利的預期心理，會讓司法獨立，大法官會有更多的異議空間，會發表更多的反對意見，這是政黨輪替對大法官集體意見表達行為的影響。透過負二項迴歸模型分析顯示，第二次政黨輪替後，大法官的異議行為有顯著增加，顯示政黨輪替確實影響大法官的意見表達行為，但其影響較為漸進，因此第一次政黨輪替的影響力並不顯著。

    在大法官個人意見表達行為部分，本文以統獨立場定位大法官的意識形態，並參考前人研究，總統可能透過提名立場相仿的大法官，改變憲法法庭決策，且交錯任期可能使大法官需要面對繼任的原反對黨總統，因此將統獨立場、提名總統及其任期、交錯任期等因素納入考量，以二層有序勝算對數模型進行分析。結果顯示，可能由於釋憲案性質因素，統獨立場的影響力不顯著；總統提名時的任期差異，導致第二任期提名的大法官，出現意見趨同的現象；而不同總統提名的大法官，交錯任期時，則可能出現反對意見增加或同意意見增加兩種不同的趨勢。

    本文以實證資料分析大法官意見表達行為，發現政治力確實對大法官有影響，大法官的司法決策行為，是政黨競爭、意識形態、提名總統、交錯任期等因素，與外在環境及制度等各項因素互動下的結果。
    參考文獻: 一、中文
    王金壽，2008，〈台灣司法改革二十年：邁向獨立之路〉，《思與言》，46(2): 133-74。
    王金壽，2012，〈台灣司法政治的興起〉，《台灣政治學刊》，16(1): 61-119。
    王泰升，2006，《台灣法律史的建立》，台北：元照。
    吳重禮、黃紀，2000，〈雲嘉南地區賄選案件判決的政治因素分析：「層狀勝算對數模型」之運用〉，《選舉研究》，7(1): 87-113。
    林繼文，2015，〈論述如何框限選擇？條件式統獨偏好對2012年台灣總統選舉的影響〉，《政治科學論叢》，63: 55-90。
    耿曙、劉嘉薇、陳陸輝，2009，〈打破維持現狀的迷思：台灣民眾統獨抉擇中理念與務實的兩難〉，《台灣政治學刊》，13(2): 3-56。
    張嘉尹，2006，《憲改與國家認同的統獨爭議》，台北：五南。
    黃丞儀，2013，〈在舊世界崩壞前-新憲政主義與賀修的霸權維持理論〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，10(4): 185-93。
    黃俊傑、何寄澎，2007，《臺灣的文化發展: 世紀之交的省思》，台灣：國立臺灣大學出版中心。
    黃昭元，2017，〈大法官解釋釋字第745號：協同意見書〉，司法院大法官解釋：https://www.judicial.gov.tw/constitutionalcourt/p03_01_1.asp?expno=745。
    黃紀、王德育，2016，《質變數與受限依變數的迴歸分析》，台北：五南。
    劉恆妏，2002，〈戰後臺灣司法人之研究－以司法官訓練文化為主的觀察〉，《思與言》，40(1): 125-82。
    劉義周，1977，〈我國歷屆大法官之產生及其背景之分析〉，《政治大學學報》，35: 287-302。
    劉嘉薇，2016，《臺灣民眾的媒體選擇與統獨立場》，台北：五南。
    蕭怡靖、黃紀，2010，〈2008年立委選舉候選人票之分析：選民個體與選區總體的多層模型〉，《台灣政治學刊》，14(1): 3-53。
    蕭怡靖、鄭夙芬，2014，〈台灣民眾對左右意識型態的認知：以統獨議題取代左右意識型態檢測台灣的政黨極化〉，《臺灣政治學刊》，18(2): 79-138。
    蘇彥圖、林建志、何漢葳，2017，〈司法院大法官解釋資料庫與司法院大法官個人資料庫【原始數據】〉，中央研究院法律學研究所法實證研究資料中心：http://www.els.sinica.edu.tw。

    二、英文
    Abraham, Henry J. 1993. The Judicial Process: An Introductory Analysis of the Courts of the United States, England, and France. New York: Oxford University Press.
    Ackerman, Bruce. 1997. “The Rise of World Constitutionalism.” Virginia Law Review 83: 771-97.
    Balkin, Jack M., and Sanford Levinson. 2001. “Understanding the Constitutional Revolution.” Virginia Law Review 87(6): 1045-1110.
    Balkin, Jack M., and Sanford Levinson. 2006. “The Processes of Constitutional Change: From Partisan Entrenchment to the National Surveillance State.” Fordham Law Review 75(2): 489-536.
    Belleau, Marie-Claire, and Rebecca Johnson. 2008. “Judging Gender: Difference and Dissent at the Supreme Court of Canada.” International Journal of the Legal Profession 15(1-2): 57-71.
    Bowie, Jennifer Barnes, Donald R. Songer, and John Szmer. 2014. The View from the Bench and Chambers: Examining Judicial Process and Decision Making on the U.S. Courts of Appeals. Virginia: University of Virginia Press.
    Brace, Paul, and Melinda Gann Hall. 1993. “Integrated Models of Judicial Dissent.” The Journal of Politics 55(4): 914-935.
    Closa, Carlos. 2006. “Book Review: Ran Hirschl, Towards Juristocracy.” International Journal of Constitutional Law 4(3): 581-86.
    Collins, Todd, and Laura Moyer. 2008. “Gender, Race, and Intersectionality on the Federal Appellate Bench.” Political Research Quarterly 61(2): 219-227.
    Comiskey, Michael. 1995. “Can Presidents Pack the Supreme Court? A Micro- and Macrolevel Look at FDR.” Congress & the Presidency 22(1): 19-33.
    Converse, Philip E. 1964. “The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics.” In Ideology and Its Discontents, ed. David E. Apter. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, pp. 206-61.
    Dahl, Robert. A. 1957. “Decision-Making in Democracy: The Supreme Court as National Policy-Maker.” Journal of Public Law 6(2), 279-95.
    Dalton Russell J., and Aiji Tanaka. 2007. “The Patterns of Party Polarization in East Asia.” Journal of East Asian Studies 7(2): 203-23.
    Ferejohn, John. 2002. “Judicializing Politics, Politicizing Law.” Law and Contemporary Problems 65: 41-68.
    Fischman, Joshua B. and David S. Law. 2009. “What Is Judicial Ideology, and How Should We Measure It?” Washington University Journal of Law & Policy 29: 133-214.
    Gates, John B. and Jeffrey E. Cohen. 1989. “Presidential Policy Preferences and Supreme Court Appointment Success.” Review of Policy Research 8(4): 800-811.
    Ginsberg, Benjamin and Martin Shefter. 2002. Politics by Other Means: Politicians, Prosecutors, and the Press from Watergate to Whitewater. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.
    Ginsburg, Tom. 2003. Judicial Review in New Democracies: Constitutional Courts in Asian Cases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Helmke, Gretchen. 2002. “The Logic of Strategic Defection: Court-Executive Relations in Argentina under Dictatorship and Democracy.” American Political Science Review 96(2): 291-303.
    Hilbe, Joseph M. 2014. Modeling Count Data. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Hirschl, Ran. 2004. Towards Juristocracy: The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Hirschl, Ran. 2008a. “The Judicialization of Mega-Politics and the Rise of Politic Court.” Annual Review of Political Science 11: 93-118.
    Hirschl, Ran. 2008b. “The Judicialization of Politics.” In The Oxford Handbook of Law and Politics, eds. Gregory A. Caldeira, R. Daniel Kelemen, and Keith E. Whittington. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 119-41.
    Hitt, Matthew P. 2013. “Presidential Success in Supreme Court Appointments: Informational Effects and Institutional Constraints.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 43(4): 792-813.
    Huang, Chi. 2018. “Generation Effects? Evolution of Independence-Unification Views in Taiwan, 1996-2016.” Electoral Studies. Forthcoming.
    Huntington, Samuel P. 1991. The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
    Keith, Linda Camp. 2012. Political Repression: Courts and the Law. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    Kmiec, Keenan D. 2004. “The Origin and Current Meanings of Judicial Activism.” California Law Review 92(5): 1441-78.
    Krapivkina, Olga A. 2016. Judicial Dissents: Legal and Linguistic Aspects. Humanities & Social Sciences 10: 2449-2459.
    Lammon, Brian D. 2010. “What We Talk About When We Talk About Ideology: Judicial Politics Scholarship and Naïve Legal Realism.” St. John`s Law Review 83(1): 231-306.
    Lin, Chien-Chih. 2016. “The Judicialization of Politics in Taiwan” Asian Journal of Law and Society 3: 299-326.
    Long, J. Scott, and Jeremy Freese. 2014. Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables Using Stata, 3rd Edition. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
    Long, J. Scott. 1997. Regression Models for Categorical and Limited Dependent Variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Maravall, José María. 2003. “The Rule of Law as a Political Weapon.” In Democracy and the Rule of Law, eds. José María Maravall and Adam Przeworski. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 261-301.
    Marshall, William P. 2002. “Conservatives and the Seven Sins of Judicial Activism.” University of Colorado Law Review 73: 101-40.
    McMillion, Barry J. 2017. Supreme Court Appointment Process: President`s Selection of a Nominee (CRS Report No. R44235).
    https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44235.pdf (accessed on December 30, 2017).
    Mietaner, Marcus. 2010. “Political Conflict Resolution and Democratic Consolidation in Indonesia: The Role of the Constitutional Court.” Journal of East Asian Studies 10(3): 397-424.
    Moustafa, T. 2007. The Struggle for Constitutional Power: Law, Politics, and Economic Reform in Egypt. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
    Peterson, Steven A. 1981. “Dissent in American Courts.” Journal of Politics 43(2): 412-434.
    Pinello, Daniel R. 1999. “Linking Party to Judicial Ideology in American Courts: A Meta-Analysis.” The Justice System Journal 20(3): 219-54.
    Ramseyer, John. 1994. “The Puzzling (In)dependence of Courts: A Comparative Approach.” The Journal of Legal Studies 23(2): 721-47.
    Raudenbush, Stephen W., and Anthony S. Bryk. 2002. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    Rohde, David W. and Harold J. Spaeth. 1976. Supreme Court Decision Making. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman & Co.
    Segal, Jeffrey, and Harold Spaeth. 2002. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. New. York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
    Sisk, Gregory C. and Michael Heise. 2005. “Judges and Ideology: Public and Academic Debates about Statistical Measures.” Cornell Law Faculty Publications. Northwestern University Law Review 99(2): 743-804.
    Su, Yen-tu and Han-wei Ho. 2016. “The Causes of Rising Opinion Dissensus on Taiwan’s Constitutional Court.” Paper presented at the 11th Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies (CELS), Duke Law School, Durham, North Carolina.
    Su, Yen-tu, Han-wei Ho and Chien-chih Lin. 2017. “Are Constitutional Court Justices Political? Exploring the Ideal Point Estimation for the Taiwan Constitutional Court, 2003-2015.” Paper presented at the Conference on Empirical Legal Studies in Asia 2017, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
    Watson, George L. and John A. Stookey. 1995. Shaping America: The Politics of Supreme Court Appointments. New York, NY: HarperCollins College Publishers.
    Weiden, David L. 2011. “Judicial Politicization, Ideology, and Activism at the High Courts of the United States, Canada, and Australia.” Political Research Quarterly 64(2): 335-347.
    Yalof, David Alistair. 1999. Pursuit of Justices: Presidential Politics and the Selection of Supreme Court Nominees. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    政治學系
    104252002
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104252002
    資料類型: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/THE.NCCU.PS.002.2018.F09
    顯示於類別:[政治學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    200201.pdf1349KbAdobe PDF2449檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋