輔仁法學第57期

本文主要將討論以民事紛爭解決為例的當代台灣的司法實踐（legal practice）中，所具有的法律與文化現象（cultural legal practice）。本文所使用的「法律與文化」現象的分析，援引美國「法律與社會」（law and society）的脈絡，該學派始自對法律霸權之批判（Mertz 2007；Sarat 2007；王曉丹 2010）。本文對法律與文化的研究立場與方法為：以「法律技術」為主要理論，由內而外（inside out）地闡述與分析法律霸權性格的「必要性」與「侷限性」。易言之，作者認為，法律規範自身所具有的強制力不僅是法規範的必然，也是維持「結構」所必須。以工具與技術為譬喻，法律專業術語和法律技術，對整體法秩序而言，為其「結構樑柱」；為了補充部門法條時而不足社會發展之個案所需，部門法專家所發展的各種法律解釋，為法秩序結構所必要的「榫接點」。這些榫接點，可能是具有法律效果的法律解釋、也可能是具有輿論效果的法律詮釋。
本文以源自法律人類學（Riles 2006；2011）而發展逐漸成熟的「法律技術」理論，討論民事紛爭解決程序中，法律與文化現象的「混搭」（mix-match），特別是以部門法之立法論與修法論、個案判決中之認事用法的分析等，試圖講出不同的法律「故事」，以豐富法律技術的多樣可能性、減少匠氣、避免僵化固著，為本文關注的研究貢獻。同時，在方法論的部分，本文希望釐清：法律與文化研究，常被誤認為實證研究的方法之一，並同時被用來與量化研究作為對比，並被批評為過於微觀、或數據不夠嚴謹等。在各類型的司法改革相關論述中，常見結語為「需要更多的實證研究」，似乎實證研究為法律改革的重要解方。當然，作者樂於見到主題更多元廣泛的量化與質化取向的法律實證研究出現、為當代台灣法學注入更多不同的知識典範。然而，作者將指出，本文對部門法律的立法論、解釋論與個案檢討，提出法律與文化的分析與詮釋，是為一種洞見（insight）層次的貢獻，而非被狹窄簡化為量化與質化之法律實證研究、或檢討彼此對「法律」的實益性、或正確性何在之無意義討論的無限迴圈。

關鍵詞：法律空間、法律文件、混搭、法律與文化、法律實證研究

This paper provides the analysis of the contemporary cultural legal phenomena particularly focusing on judicial practice of law. The theoretical analytical framework comes from the Law and Society originated from the United States ( Mertz 2007; Sarat 2007). Furthermore, the author employs the theory of Legal Technicality to analyze the limitation yet necessity of the systematic heretical disputing process in civil courts.
For demonstrating how the legal technique, legal document, legal language influence the mutual understanding and misunderstanding among inside legal experts and outside lay persons, the author employs three different subjects of cases to present stories from the legal anthropological perspective. The author indicates that there is a distinguished Mix-Match cultural legal phenomena in the process of civil dispute settlement under the courts’ supervision. It is not the issue to decide which way would be the right or wrong way to make the legal interpretation from Japanese or German legal system, or even from the Chinese Confucian legal culture. Even it would not be right or wrong to have the legal interpretation from the grass root of local society. It is all about the Mix-Match cultural legal phenomena. Since then, basing on this epistemological understanding, the author hopes to enrich the methods, theories, and interpretation which contributing to black letter law of civil dispute settlement nowadays in Taiwan.

Keywords: Space of law, legal document, mix-match, law and culture, Empirical Legal Studies

目次
壹、法律「空間」：抽象概念與具體行動之混搭共構
一、關於法律技術理論
二、關於法律文件理論
三、關於法律空間的多重混搭
貳、法律空間中之三種不同的民事紛爭類型
一、典型核心家庭之破裂與重組：家事事件中之法律混搭的立法、解釋與實踐
二、支付命令修法爭議中的法律與文化
三、醫療紛爭中的法律與文化：評「孕婦闌尾炎」之「醫」「法」並進的法律與文化
參、結論：混搭非正典？實證是解藥？—在穩定結構中求取「平衡」（而非「雙贏」）之紛爭解決方案

數位時代下的網路通訊來臨，二十一世紀的現代社會不論哪一行業，都離不開網路，司法實務的犯罪偵查，更是少不了運用網路進行偵查。然而面對網路通訊資料取得監察的新領域，法律規範似乎有些未盡之處，仍有待釐清與反思。網路通訊監察重大干預通訊自由與資訊自決的基本權，因此必須得到法律的授權，並且由法官針對個案依照比例原則加以實質審查。
為了防止網路通訊資料取得的可能弊端，規範上應遵守事前審查以及事後審查的雙軌審查制度，亦即事前須符合重罪原則、嚴格遵守程序以及禁止一票吃到底與無限制的續行偵查。此外，事後應搭配嚴格證據審查以及事後告知等方式，避免檢警為了偵查犯罪，而更進一步侵害人民基本權利。
網路通訊監察必須得到業者的配合，否則很難對於擷取的封包進行解密。特別是軟體資訊業者的配合。網路通訊業者，使用封包方式禁止第三方侵入，造成網路偵查的困境。更有甚者，相關業者為保護秘密而拒絕揭開封包，可以想像這些網路軟體，可能成為隱匿刑事犯罪證據的溫床，因此有必要增加新的規範，使未來新的科技偵查，有相對應的法源依據。本文針對網路通訊資料的監察，如何加以適當約束，避免人民的基本權受到侵犯，提出相關建議，俾解決取得網路通訊資料的困境。

關鍵詞：數位時代、網路通訊監察、線上搜索、基本權干預、法律保留

Along with the evolution of internet communication in digital era, the internet has been applying in all walks of modern society in 21st century, not to mention the using of internet for the criminal investigation by judicial practice. However, facing this new field of surveillance on the acquisition of internet communication materials, relevant regulations seem to be inadequate and remains to be clarified and reflected. Internet Communication Surveillance interferes fundamental rights concerning the freedom of communication and the self-determination of information, so that it shall be authorized by laws and examined substantively by judges to each case according to the principle of proportionality. In order to prevent the possible abuse of materials acquiring from internet communication, it shall follow the dual-track review system, in advance and afterwards, in regulation. That is, it shall, in advance, comply with the principle of serious crime as well as due procedure strictly, and it is forbidden to use only one single warrant throughout the whole surveillance process and carry out the investigation unlimitedly. In addition, it shall go with the ways afterwards such as strict evidence review and informing to the court concerned afterwards etc., which avoids further infringement of people’s fundamental rights by the crime investigation from prosecutors and the police.
Internet communication surveillance must cooperate with the industry, especially with software and information industry, otherwise it is hard to decrypt the captured packets. The internet communication industry uses packets as measures to prohibit from the invasion of the third party, which leads to a difficult situation for the internet investigation. Furthermore, related industries refuse to open packets for the reason of secrets protection, and these internet software might, imaginably, become a breeding ground for concealing criminal evidence. Therefore, it is necessary to add new regulation as corresponding legal basis for the new scientific and technological ways of investigation in the future. This article would make relevant suggestions of proper restraints on the internet communication surveillance to avoid the infringement of people's fundamental rights, so that to solve the dilemma of acquiring data from internet communication.

Keywords: Digital Era, Internet Communication Surveillance, Online Search, Fundamental Rights Interference, Legal Reservation

目次
壹、前言
貳、監察網路通訊為抗制犯罪之利器
一、網路通訊之監察
二、網路通訊監察與線上搜索不同
參、監察網路通訊所干預之基本權及其正當化依據
一、受干預之基本權
二、干預之正當化基礎
肆、網路通訊監察之規範與界限
一、事前審查機制之原則
二、事後監督機制與法效性確保
伍、監察網路通訊之實務困境及其解決
一、實務運作上之困境
二、出路之建議
陸、結語

隨著伊斯蘭消費者意識之抬頭，清真認證及標示制度儼然已成為市場上的新寵。然而，各國對於清真產品之規範及制度不一，不但增加了清真產品之成本，亦有可能對清真產品之市場進入造成妨礙，在國際貿易法領域中，即產生了如何在保障宗教自由、保護消費者知的權利及消除貿易障礙二者間取得平衡之問題。雖然Codex已就包裝產品如何使用「清真（halal）」一詞制定了指導原則，但是由於清真標準，係從宗教儀式及教規衍生而來，並非依據科學證據所建立之標準，執行上存有較大的解釋空間，在同時欠缺透明性的情況下，極易造成法規之不確定性。由於印尼於2014年甫通過了清真產品保證法，此一法規即將於2019年底生效，不但適用範圍廣泛，包括了食品、藥品、化粧品、生物製品及基因轉殖產品等，亦包含了相關服務。其所新增之清真認證及標示義務，甚至包括非清真資訊之提供等更是其他國家所未見之高強度規範，受影響之產業及產品眾多。本文認為，從此一法規做為出發點，得以更具體地瞭解清真認證制度對國際貿易之影響及可能產生之爭議，因此本文分別就印尼清真產品保證法之重要規定、國際標準之相關原則等先予敘明，再依據WTO之相關個案對TBT協定條文之適用及解釋，討論系爭法規所可能產生之爭議。

關鍵詞：清真產品、清真認證、清真標示、技術性貿易障礙、印尼清真產品保證法

With the rise of Islamic consumer’s awareness, the halal certification and labeling system has become a new concerned issue in the Islamic market. However, the different standards and systems for halal products not only increase the cost of halal products, but also hinder the market access of halal products. In the field of international trade law, there is always a controversial issue of how to strike the balance between guaranteeing religious freedom, protecting consumers’ rights and eliminating trade barriers. Although Codex has established a criterion for the usage of the term “halal” in packaged products, most of the domestic rules and practices of halal products derived from religious ceremonies and canons makes the implementation of the rules still be interpreted depending on the sects heavily. In the absence of transparency at the same time, it is easy to cause regulatory uncertainty. Amid the Islamic-dominant countries, Indonesia is the first country that passed the mandatory halal product law, which covers the compulsory obligations of halal labeling and certification, and even includes the “non-halal” labeling. It is now possible to understand more specifically the impact of the halal certification system on international trade and the possible disputes from this regulation. Striking the balance between the WTO member’s right to regulate with the purpose of protecting consumers’ right of information derivatizing from the religious belief and the possibility to contravene its international trade obligation in the context of WTO Law, especially in the TBT Agreement, is an extremely imperative and harsh work. This paper seeks to examine the WTO consistency of the new Indonesian Halal Act, and to find out whether the public moral or consumer protection objectives underlying the mandatory halal certification and labelling can be justified in the context of the TBT Agreement.

Keywords: Halal Product, Halal Certification, Halal Labeling, TBT Agreement, Halal Product Assurance Law

目次
壹、前言
貳、清真用語之國際標準
一、清真食品之認定
二、隔離要求及交叉污染之認定
三、禁止安全營養及健康連結之規定
四、外國認證機構之承認
參、印尼之清真產品保證法
一、印尼之清真認證及標示制度
二、印尼2014年清真產品保證法
（一）立法目的及適用範圍
（二）產品清真性之認定
（三）清真認證之相關規定
（四）清真標示之相關規定
（五）國際合作之規定
肆、清真產品保證法與TBT協定之合致性
一、印尼清真產品保證法之性質
二、TBT協定第2.1條之不歧視原則：以差異性之包裝規範為例
（一）印尼冷凍雞肉產品案
（二）規範差異之合法性判斷
三、TBT協定第2.2條之必要原則：以強制標示規範及非清真標示為例
（一）強制性標示之必要性
（二）非清真標示之必要性
四、TBT協定第2.4條之調和原則：以非清真標示及交叉污染之認定為例
（一）非清真標示義務
（二）交叉污染風險之認定
伍、結論

低利潤有限責任公司（Low-profit Limited Liability Company, L3C）乃美國第一部特別為社會企業所立之專法，具有組織彈性與社會任務優先的特點，自2008年佛蒙特州立法以來已產生不小影響力。本文擬針對L3C立法的遠因與近因、資金結構設計、法規內容以及制度的缺失加以討論與分析，並以美國法之「公益公司」為對照，比較兩種立法模式之優缺點，藉此更深入理解美國社會企業立法內涵。目前國內就社會企業立法討論上，大多聚焦於「公益公司」型態，惟本文根據立法模式之不同，以及基於組織彈性與我國企業多屬中小規模等因素，認為我國將來在社會企業相關立法上，似可將L3C納入選項，以反映社會企業不同之需求。本文結論建議配合調整現行有限公司法制架構，作為引進L3C的必要配套，最後並綜合美國立法經驗觀察提出若干立法建議作為本文結論。

關鍵詞：低利潤有限責任公司、社會企業、公益公司、企業社會責任、股東利益最大化

In the United States, when Vermont adopted the legislation of Low-profit Limited Liability Company (L3C) in 2008, L3C became the first special organization designed for needs of social enterprise. With features like Limited Liability Company (LLC) which is highly contractual framework, L3C puts its social mission prior to profit-making to make sure the former to be achieved. In Taiwan, another legislation called Benefit Corporation has been frequently discussed while L3C has not drawn too much attention in practice and academia. Unlike the existing body of literature in Taiwan mainly focusing on Benefit Corporation, this article will center on issues of L3C legislation, including its formation, capital structure, organizational structure, and potential drawbacks. Generally, L3Cs can run more flexibly than corporations and can reduce legal compliance cost substantially, so such institution can be a good choice for small and medium enterprises in Taiwan. This article suggests that L3C may become one of choices for Taiwan’s social entrepreneurs when Taiwan considers introducing social enterprise legislation from the U.S. This article will also provide some suggestions for Taiwan’s future social enterprise legislation.

Keywords: Low-Profit Limited Liability Company, Social Enterprise, Benefit Corporation, Corporate Social Responsibility, Maximize Shareholders’ Interest Interpretation by the Control Yuan, Constitutional Interpretation Procedure Act

目次
壹、前言
貳、社會企業之緣起及發展
一、社會企業概念
二、CSR與社會企業
（一）CSR爭論之遞嬗
（二）社會企業與CSR本質上之不同：社會企業非新的CSR
三、社會企業面臨之挑戰
（一）現有組織不利社會企業運作
（二）受任人義務（Fiduciary Duty）之爭議
參、美國法低利潤有限責任公司之介紹
一、背景
（一）L3C立法之浪潮
（二）L3C與PRI的因緣
（三）分層性投資之設計
二、從LLC到L3C的發展
（一）LLC制度介紹
（二）LLC與L3C之糾葛
三、各州 L3C制度之差異與不足
（一）各州L3C之特殊規定
（二）公益行為資訊公開及第三人標準付之闕如
四、美國社會企業特別立法之其他型態：公益公司
（一）公益公司法之發展
（二）公益公司法之規範
（三）美國社會企業立法模式之比較
肆、L3C制度引進之可能性：代結論
一、我國社會企業立法之發展概述
二、L3C制度引進之探討