各位朋友，大家好
苗栗縣政府正式發文給大埔自救會成員，表示要強力拆屋，這與三年前的協議內容（基地及房屋原位置保留）完全不同，大埔自救會、台灣農村陣線、及來自各地的自救會朋友們，明日（6/27）上午10點將重回行政院前進行抗議，如果您時間允許，還請大家一起來給予協助，我們很需要您的幫忙，謝謝。
徐世榮敬上
2013年6月26日 星期三
2013年6月20日 星期四
都市計畫與正當行政程序：請台南市政府把人當人看！
《都市更新條例》三條文於今年四月被大法官宣布違憲，其主要理由乃是這些條文不符合憲法所要求的正當行政程序。釋字第709號解釋文指出，這是因為都市更新事業計畫的形成過程中，「並未要求主管機關應將該計畫相關資訊，對更新單元內申請人以外之其他土地及合法建築物所有權人分別為送達，且未規定由主管機關以公開方式舉辦聽證，使利害關係人得到場以言詞為意見之陳述及論辯後，斟酌全部聽證紀錄，說明採納及不採納之理由作成核定…」。這號解釋文頗受社會各界讚揚，因為它明白指出我們所追尋的公共利益與正當行政程序無法分離；也就是說，我們必須透過正當行政程序，經由公平公開公正的民眾參與，共同來捕捉及形塑那抽象及難以界定的公共利益。反之，當正當行政程序沒有被確實履行時，政府行政機關的行政作為就極有可能是公共利益的扭曲及誤導，並造成人民財產權、生存權、及居住權的嚴重侵害。
《都市更新條例》是《都市計畫法》的子法，二者緊密相嵌，其應履行之正當行政程序應無二致。因此，當前者被明白宣布違憲之時，那目前行政程序規範更顯粗糙的後者，它能夠迴避這個嚴肅課題嗎？「都市計畫」的影響層面遠比「都市更新事業計畫」更深更廣，它難道不應履行嚴謹的正當行政程序嗎？在釋字第709號解釋文提出之後，多年來積極推動正當行政程序的許玉秀前大法官，相當的興奮，特別應成功大學法律學系之邀，進行「釋憲之路的新里程：喚醒正當法律程序原則之魂」演講，她特別強調「正義始於程序終於程序」，因為我們必須尊重人性尊嚴及尊重人的主體地位，她說，「未遵守正當程序原則的程序，進入程序的人隨時淪為客體。正當法律程序所要實現的，就是把人當主體加以對待。」而這也就是她演講最終的精彩結語：我是人！
那麼，試問台灣現行的都市計畫有把人當人看嗎？在都市計畫形成的過程中，我們到底是是主體、還是客體？很遺憾地，縱然是到了21世紀，我們的都市計畫卻依舊是把人當成客體來對待，也就是台灣的都市計畫根本不把人當人看，而台南市政府最近在辦理台南市鐵路地下化都市計畫變更案就是一個最佳的例子。
我國現行都市計畫主要是建構於1960年代，當時派駐於台灣的聯合國顧問團把那時國外流行的規劃理念引入台灣，這些理念包含非常強調數量分析模型的系統論、及以技術專家與行政官僚決策為主的菁英規劃模式。都市計畫的價值取向變成非常強調提高經濟效率、及專家決策技術面向，我們的都市計畫長久以來也是由此來界定所謂的公共利益，嚴重忽略對於基本人權的尊重。相對的，我們也可以由制度面的修改時間來予印證，即《都市計畫法》分別於1964年及1973年進行重要修訂，並將上述規劃理念融入，從此確立了我國《都市計畫法》的基本架構，這也使得正當行政程序一直未獲重視。
這樣的規劃理念特別受到權力擁有者的喜愛，因為它們不僅不挑戰不公平的權力及利益結構，並且往往將不公義的社會問題扭曲為技術及工具的專業問題，由此剝奪了人民應有的選擇權力，進而消滅了人的主體地位，並使得其財產權、生存權、居住權等皆不獲保障。配合著過往的高壓威權統治，不論是都市計畫、區域計畫、或是土地徵收其實都被技術化及邊緣化了，民眾的意見及選擇根本不受到重視，反而是少數權力擁有者，他們的意見才是重要的，而我們也就一直承繼了這樣狹隘的規劃理念，至今依舊不改，公共利益就由這一小撮人在做決定。
但是，釋字第709號解釋文開啟了重要的一扇門，它將帶領我們走向另外一個都市計畫典範，但是權力及利益的擁有者卻是繼續頑強抵抗，不願意放棄他們現今所享有的既得利益。針對「反台南鐵路東移自救會」依據釋字第709號解釋文所提辦理聽證會的請求，台南市政府於日前正式回文拒絕，理由為「其案件性質及法源規定與本案並不相同，應無適用。」這樣的回應依舊是不把人當人看，台南市政府仍然不願意履行正當行政程序。試問，縱然台南市是由民進黨執政，其對於人性尊嚴的忽視與國民黨籍縣市首長又有何差別？
近日來，立法院針對《會計法》進行修法，由於欲讓顏清標公款私用除罪化，輿論譁然，連帶也讓民進黨大傷，因為我們看不到民進黨與國民黨的差別，我們根本看不到它有要提升道德水準及促進公平正義的作為，我們也看不到民進黨的地方執政者願意揚棄過往都市計畫的顢頇專制，把人民當成主體來對待。民進黨曾執政八年，並喊出轉型正義口號，但試問，多年來多少不合時宜的法規制度被修改了？再者，法規縱然沒有改，民進黨就可以以此為推託理由，延遲人民對於正當行政程序的渴望？如果以法規未改為理由，那民進黨與國民黨又有何差別呢？
展望未來，我們應該看誰願意來修改威權時代所遺留下來的許多缺乏正當行政程序的法規制度，而不是寄望於那隨時可變的民意調查。政黨輪替又如何？五星市長又如何？還不是繼續蹂躪人權！
2013年6月8日 星期六
Stimulus just more land grabbing
As it always does when it wants to boost a sluggish economy, the Cabinet recently proposed several short-term economic stimulus measures.
This should be something to celebrate, but, looking back at many similar government measures in the past, it is hard to be optimistic. It is likely many plots of land and houses listed for national construction projects will be expropriated, thus forcing residents to move out.
Many of the economic stimulus plans in the past were in essence land development projects, with the central or local government drawing up plans for local development, and then rezoning the land in the surrounding areas. This is how large tracts of farmland were redesignated for housing or commercial use, causing land prices to soar.
Through this method, speculative real-estate groups, backed by large corporations, make huge inappropriate profits, while the government uses it to buy off local politicians and also make a profit.
Is all this public land? No. The vast majority of it is private.
The government is taking advantage of how many farming areas have become impoverished and underdeveloped because of an aging society.
Instead of helping elderly farmers, it hits them when they are down by using expropriation or rezoning to force them to leave their farms.
The public sees and hears of so many major national construction projects, but how many of them are carried out?
Is there a real need for all this land to be expropriated? Do these projects stick to the original plans?
If they do not, does it mean the majority of these local development plans are fake and their only goal is to expropriate land and deprive people of their property?
On May 9, the Control Yuan reprimanded the Ministry of the Interior for its expropriation policies. According to the Control Yuan’s investigation of all land expropriation projects carried out by the government until December 2011, a total of 132 projects had not been used for the approved development within the time limit stipulated by the expropriation plan. These projects had been approved up to as early as 25 years ago and cover more than 1,370 hectares.
According to the Control Yuan, aside from leaving the expropriated land idle, people who claimed they had a use for the land failed to proactively come up with response measures to rectify the issue, review the original local development plans, or cancel the projects in accordance with the law.
The authorities in charge of these projects also failed to regulate and supervise these people, and to push them to meet their responsibilities according to the law, thus leaving these expropriated land idle for so many years, the Control Yuan added.
Furthermore, the Ministry of the Interior, as the competent authority in charge of implementing the Land Expropriation Act (土地徵收條例), seriously neglected its duty by failing to make all parties handle things in accordance with the law, the Control Yuan said.
The Control Yuan’s reprimand highlights the problem of excessive land expropriation in the nation and a lack of respect for the constitutionally protected right to own property and right to life.
The government often draws up local development plans without carefully studying how land will be expropriated and what the land will be used for. It basically agrees to any local suggestion.
This most recent reprimand by the Control Yuan only concerns regular land expropriation and does not include zone expropriation development projects.
If the various zone expropriation development projects, such as those going on in Miaoli County’s Dapu Borough (大浦), the Puyu (璞玉) development program in Hsinchu County’s Jhubei Township (竹北), the Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport MRT project, the project in Danhai New Town (淡海新市鎮) in New Taipei City’s (新北市) Tamsui District (淡水) and the Taoyuan Aerotropolis (桃園航空城) project were included, the number of cases involved would be even larger.
Economic stimulus plans proposed by the government should at least adhere to two major principles. First, they should not sacrifice public benefits and welfare. Second, they should strictly follow due process.
The government’s current actions are not in line with these principles. It carelessly uses its coercive power, deprives disadvantaged groups of their rights and welfare, and uses unjust administrative procedures to create a bunch of fake GDP growth data.
These actions have only assisted big corporations and speculators in driving up real-estate prices and contributed to the problem of social inequality.
Economic stimulus plans like these are frightening and the public would be better off without them.
Hsu Shih-jung is a professor in the Department of Land Economics at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Drew Cameron
Publish at the Taipei Times, 2013/06/08, p. 8.
This should be something to celebrate, but, looking back at many similar government measures in the past, it is hard to be optimistic. It is likely many plots of land and houses listed for national construction projects will be expropriated, thus forcing residents to move out.
Many of the economic stimulus plans in the past were in essence land development projects, with the central or local government drawing up plans for local development, and then rezoning the land in the surrounding areas. This is how large tracts of farmland were redesignated for housing or commercial use, causing land prices to soar.
Through this method, speculative real-estate groups, backed by large corporations, make huge inappropriate profits, while the government uses it to buy off local politicians and also make a profit.
Is all this public land? No. The vast majority of it is private.
The government is taking advantage of how many farming areas have become impoverished and underdeveloped because of an aging society.
Instead of helping elderly farmers, it hits them when they are down by using expropriation or rezoning to force them to leave their farms.
The public sees and hears of so many major national construction projects, but how many of them are carried out?
Is there a real need for all this land to be expropriated? Do these projects stick to the original plans?
If they do not, does it mean the majority of these local development plans are fake and their only goal is to expropriate land and deprive people of their property?
On May 9, the Control Yuan reprimanded the Ministry of the Interior for its expropriation policies. According to the Control Yuan’s investigation of all land expropriation projects carried out by the government until December 2011, a total of 132 projects had not been used for the approved development within the time limit stipulated by the expropriation plan. These projects had been approved up to as early as 25 years ago and cover more than 1,370 hectares.
According to the Control Yuan, aside from leaving the expropriated land idle, people who claimed they had a use for the land failed to proactively come up with response measures to rectify the issue, review the original local development plans, or cancel the projects in accordance with the law.
The authorities in charge of these projects also failed to regulate and supervise these people, and to push them to meet their responsibilities according to the law, thus leaving these expropriated land idle for so many years, the Control Yuan added.
Furthermore, the Ministry of the Interior, as the competent authority in charge of implementing the Land Expropriation Act (土地徵收條例), seriously neglected its duty by failing to make all parties handle things in accordance with the law, the Control Yuan said.
The Control Yuan’s reprimand highlights the problem of excessive land expropriation in the nation and a lack of respect for the constitutionally protected right to own property and right to life.
The government often draws up local development plans without carefully studying how land will be expropriated and what the land will be used for. It basically agrees to any local suggestion.
This most recent reprimand by the Control Yuan only concerns regular land expropriation and does not include zone expropriation development projects.
If the various zone expropriation development projects, such as those going on in Miaoli County’s Dapu Borough (大浦), the Puyu (璞玉) development program in Hsinchu County’s Jhubei Township (竹北), the Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport MRT project, the project in Danhai New Town (淡海新市鎮) in New Taipei City’s (新北市) Tamsui District (淡水) and the Taoyuan Aerotropolis (桃園航空城) project were included, the number of cases involved would be even larger.
Economic stimulus plans proposed by the government should at least adhere to two major principles. First, they should not sacrifice public benefits and welfare. Second, they should strictly follow due process.
The government’s current actions are not in line with these principles. It carelessly uses its coercive power, deprives disadvantaged groups of their rights and welfare, and uses unjust administrative procedures to create a bunch of fake GDP growth data.
These actions have only assisted big corporations and speculators in driving up real-estate prices and contributed to the problem of social inequality.
Economic stimulus plans like these are frightening and the public would be better off without them.
Hsu Shih-jung is a professor in the Department of Land Economics at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Drew Cameron
Publish at the Taipei Times, 2013/06/08, p. 8.
2013年6月1日 星期六
可怕的振興經濟方案
一如往例，為了振興經濟，行政院再度提出多項提振景氣方案，這本該是值得期待的事情，然而檢視政府過去眾多的類似經驗，卻無法讓人樂觀，因為有許多的土地及房屋很有可能因為掛名為「國家重大建設」計劃案而被強制徵收，許多住民也將被迫遷離。
過往的許多振興經濟方案，本質都是土地開發案。經由中央或地方政府提出相關興辦事業計劃，政府在此計劃周遭提出更大面積的土地使用變更計劃，由此構成了蛋黃與蛋白二個部分，許多農地由此變更為住商建築用地，地價因此翻轉了好幾倍，以財團派系為主幹的不動產投機集團由此賺進了龐大的不當利益，而政府也是藉此手法來收編地方政治人士及獲利。
然而這些土地是公有地嗎？不是，絕大多數都是私有土地，政府趁農村陷於凋敝窳陋及人口老化之際，不僅不伸出援手，反而是落井下石，用土地徵收或土地重劃的手法來逼迫老農離農。
因此，我們看見國家重大建設何其多，但真正落實者又有多少呢？徵收取得的土地確有需要嗎？它們有依當初的計劃確實執行嗎？如果沒有，那是否表示這些興辦事業計劃絕大多數都是虛假的？其真正目的只是為了實現土地徵收，進行對私有土地的掠奪罷了。監察院在上月9日對內政部提出了重要的糾正案，指出「經查截至100年12月底止，各級政府已徵收土地中，計有132件徵收案，土地面積逾137萬餘平方公尺，自核准徵收迄今已約4至25年餘，卻未於徵收計劃所訂期限內，按照核准徵收計劃書所定興辦事業之使用目的及用途完成使用。」
又，「上開各需用土地人於上開已徵收土地閒置期間，未積極研謀因應方式，或檢討其興辦事業計劃，亦未依相關規定辦理撤銷或廢止徵收，任令已徵收土地閒置迄今，又其上級事業主管機關未能確實列管督促所屬之各需用土地人，積極依法檢討辦理，致已徵收土地閒置多年，迄未依徵收計劃完成使用，另內政部身為土地徵收條例之中央主管機關，未落實要求各需用土地人及其上級事業主管機關依法辦理，均核有嚴重怠失。」此糾正案清楚指出我國土地徵收極為浮濫的嚴重問題，這也表示《憲法》所保障的財產權及生存權完全不受尊重。政府隨意提出興辦事業計劃，之後的土地使用計劃及土地徵收計劃大抵也都未嚴格審查，它們基本上是完全的配合。於此，須特別提醒的是，本糾正案僅只針對一般徵收，尚且不包括區段徵收，倘若把眾多的區段徵收案也列入（如苗栗大埔、新竹璞玉、機場捷運A7、淡海新市鎮、桃園航空城等），那數據一定會更為驚人！
政府提出的振興經濟方案至少應該謹守二大原則，即不犧牲人民目前所享有的福祉及嚴格履行正當法律程序，但是目前的作法卻非如此，政府胡亂釋出公權力，剝奪社會弱勢者的福祉，並以不符公義的行政程序，來成就那虛假的GDP數據，但實際上卻是協助財團派系及投機客進行不動產炒作，造成社會更大的不公平。這樣的振興經濟方案相當可怕，不要也罷！
本文發表於《蘋果日報》，2013/06/01。
過往的許多振興經濟方案，本質都是土地開發案。經由中央或地方政府提出相關興辦事業計劃，政府在此計劃周遭提出更大面積的土地使用變更計劃，由此構成了蛋黃與蛋白二個部分，許多農地由此變更為住商建築用地，地價因此翻轉了好幾倍，以財團派系為主幹的不動產投機集團由此賺進了龐大的不當利益，而政府也是藉此手法來收編地方政治人士及獲利。
然而這些土地是公有地嗎？不是，絕大多數都是私有土地，政府趁農村陷於凋敝窳陋及人口老化之際，不僅不伸出援手，反而是落井下石，用土地徵收或土地重劃的手法來逼迫老農離農。
土地徵收過於浮濫
因此，我們看見國家重大建設何其多，但真正落實者又有多少呢？徵收取得的土地確有需要嗎？它們有依當初的計劃確實執行嗎？如果沒有，那是否表示這些興辦事業計劃絕大多數都是虛假的？其真正目的只是為了實現土地徵收，進行對私有土地的掠奪罷了。監察院在上月9日對內政部提出了重要的糾正案，指出「經查截至100年12月底止，各級政府已徵收土地中，計有132件徵收案，土地面積逾137萬餘平方公尺，自核准徵收迄今已約4至25年餘，卻未於徵收計劃所訂期限內，按照核准徵收計劃書所定興辦事業之使用目的及用途完成使用。」
又，「上開各需用土地人於上開已徵收土地閒置期間，未積極研謀因應方式，或檢討其興辦事業計劃，亦未依相關規定辦理撤銷或廢止徵收，任令已徵收土地閒置迄今，又其上級事業主管機關未能確實列管督促所屬之各需用土地人，積極依法檢討辦理，致已徵收土地閒置多年，迄未依徵收計劃完成使用，另內政部身為土地徵收條例之中央主管機關，未落實要求各需用土地人及其上級事業主管機關依法辦理，均核有嚴重怠失。」此糾正案清楚指出我國土地徵收極為浮濫的嚴重問題，這也表示《憲法》所保障的財產權及生存權完全不受尊重。政府隨意提出興辦事業計劃，之後的土地使用計劃及土地徵收計劃大抵也都未嚴格審查，它們基本上是完全的配合。於此，須特別提醒的是，本糾正案僅只針對一般徵收，尚且不包括區段徵收，倘若把眾多的區段徵收案也列入（如苗栗大埔、新竹璞玉、機場捷運A7、淡海新市鎮、桃園航空城等），那數據一定會更為驚人！
不應剝奪弱勢福祉
政府提出的振興經濟方案至少應該謹守二大原則，即不犧牲人民目前所享有的福祉及嚴格履行正當法律程序，但是目前的作法卻非如此，政府胡亂釋出公權力，剝奪社會弱勢者的福祉，並以不符公義的行政程序，來成就那虛假的GDP數據，但實際上卻是協助財團派系及投機客進行不動產炒作，造成社會更大的不公平。這樣的振興經濟方案相當可怕，不要也罷！
本文發表於《蘋果日報》，2013/06/01。
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)