| Abstract: | 台灣進入福利國家與多元人口國家時代，資源與機會之分配是否公平，國家與社會 之歧視現象應如何處理，逐漸成為新世紀的重要課題。憲法學上最重要的相關議題，就 是運用憲法上的「平等」概念，實現平等的誡命。但我國目前無論實務或學說，在探究 憲法上之平等原則時，均基於高度工具理性取向之形式主義平等理論，在「同／異」、「事 物本質」等空洞概念上斤斤計較，而未能正視「平等」所具有之社會正義實質價值。即 便大法官在多號解釋使用「實質平等」之用語，究其內涵仍不脫形式主義的邏輯運作。 形式主義的平等概念，一方面未必符合憲法原意，同時也忽視了世界各國憲法界正 深入探究中的「實質平等」概念。本研究擬參照美國學界中批判學派—包括批判法學研 究、女性主義法學與批判種族理論等—對形式主義平等權理論之批評，指出我國通說下 的平等權，不但在法律邏輯上空洞，更阻礙了政治部門與社會團體積極消弭社會歧視之 努力。「等者等之」之平等原則，強化主流價值之偏見與貶抑效果、鞏固不平等之社會 條件，並以「趨同」之偏見壓制邊緣與非主流。 本研究將重新建構憲法上「實質平等」之概念，將反貶抑、反排拒、多元文化主義 等具有社會正義色彩之實質價值引入憲法，以使憲法平等能夠與社會需求更加緊密連 結，同時也提供憲法學界一個不同的批判視野。
How to distribute opportunities fairly and eliminate social discrimination are increasingly critical when Taiwan is going into a welfare state and plural population era. One of the most significant tasks for constitutional law must be applying the constitutional commitment to equality to realize meaningful equality among social components. Nonetheless, the mainstream view on constitutional equality largely adheres to the formalist concept of equality, which is against the backdrop of instrumental rationality. In dealing with equality issues, legal circles emphasize the empty ideas such as 「sameness/difference」, 「the nature of matter」, but ignore the substantive value of social justice inherent in constitutional equality. Despite the rhetoric of 「substantive equality」 used by a number of Grand Justices』 Interpretations, their understanding of equality is still highly formalistic. For one thing, the formalist notion of equality is inconsistent with the framers』 intent, for another, it neglects the real 「substantive equality」 concept which is fashionable across the constitutional law circles across nations. Therefore, this study plan to use the critical theories of jurisprudence developed in the U.S., which mainly consist of the various Schools such as Critical Legal Studies, Feminist Jurisprudence, and Critical Race Theories, to criticize the formalist understanding of constitutional equality. This study will indicate that such a formalist understanding of equality has some significant shortcomings: it not only makes the Equality Clause in the Constitution redundancy; but also compromises the political and social efforts in overcoming social subordination. The 「treating likes alike」 version of equality virtually strengthens the prejudices and subordinating effects implied within the mainstream values, entrenches the unequal social conditions, and awards the 「sameness」 and then oppresses and marginal or non-mainstream voices. This Study is further intended to restructure the 「substantive equality」 concept in Taiwan』s constitutional law, to introduce the substantive values such as anti-subordination, anti-exclusion, and multiculturalism and so forth into the constitutional law scheme. Accordingly, constitutional equality could fit the social demands more closely, and the constitutional law circles may have a novel but valuable perspective. |
