The discussion of litigants’ remedy rights of unconstitutional judicial review “Periodical expiration announcement” by Justices

• Main Authors: Shu-Ching Yang, 楊淑卿
• Other Authors: Ming-Shuou Cherng
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2011
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/97732610812555162107

碩士 === 東吳大學 === 法律學系 === 99 === “Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act” is the current unconstitutional judicial review system which established in 2003 and applies until now. According with keeping improvement, Judicial Yuan convened several conferences and adjusted some issues of Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act to be renamed as “Constitution lawsuit”. The 112nd conference of Judicial Yuan approved the “Constitution lawsuit” in December 27th in 2005 and declaimed in January 5th in 2006. The protocol is totally 5 chapters and 67 articles. The legislators of sixth session did not accomplish the “Constitution lawsuit” before their term. Therefore, Judicial Yuan applied the lawsuit to deliberate by Legislative Yuan. There are two types Justices unconstitutional declarations to recognize “Immediate expiration declaration” and “periodical expiration declaration”. Most of practices started to expire when the appointed date expiration explanted. Before the appointed date expiration, it still works at on the constitutionality of the statute or regulation relied thereupon by the court of last resort in its final judgment. In the other hand, “periodical expiration declaration” is not helpful for the litigant who applied constitutional interpretation. We observed and sorted to have suggestion from the 419 explanations by Judicial Yuan Justices during 25.5 years from January 1986 to June 2011. And analyzing every statistic target from two declarations of “Immediate expiration declaration” and “periodical expiration declaration” got findings and suggestions to this dissertation. This dissertation is the discussion of periodical expiration declaration. According to the interpretation, the litigations are rejected by the judiciary of petition for retrial and applying action for retrial. How do they get their deserved remedies by the practice of Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act and related Constitution lawsuit Protocol? Is the Constitution lawsuit Protocol proper to our country? The suggestions what we should be adjusted of Constitution lawsuit Protocol.