感謝分享!

http://www.yyj.tw/index.php/product/%e5%a8%81%e7%88%be%e5%89%9b/

不會啦~~
大家各有所長
只是我的專長在靠妖跟罵男人!!

XDD

很棒的文章

寫的很有力道
(我的就有弱雞感)
哈

多謝 Windseeker 的分享
每個人看待王家拆房子的都有自己的想法
多謝你提供另外一面的省思

^_^

我覺得張同學的原文最大的問題之一，就是他用「事後諸葛」的方式「倒果為因」，一再強調「如果王家當初有積極參加公聽會的話，就不會...」，但是他完全沒有從民眾行為時的「預見可能性」的角度做思考。在一個法治國家中，如果要讓人民承擔一定行為（包括缺席這種不作為）的不利益，就必須要讓民眾有預見可能性。請問︰在都更條例根本沒有規定「缺席公聽會將發生失權後果」的情況下，一般民眾如何可能知悉「出席這個公聽會表達反對」是如此關鍵？我們若是在問題發生之後才用一副「事後諸葛」的口吻說「誰叫他們當初沒有如何如何」，豈不只是更加凸顯某種「假理性／真冷漠」下的事不關己的心態？更別提它根本違反了「讓民眾可預見自己行為後果」的法治原則。

另一個嚴重的問題在於︰事實上都更條例並沒有要求民眾必須參加公聽會、完全是自由參加，而且就算是權利人真的出席表達反對意見，那個反對意見也不一定會被採納。那麼我可不可以請問你們︰在邏輯上和法理上，即使只是用體系解釋和目的解釋，法律為什麼要針對一個「自由參加，而且就算參加表示反對也不一定有用」的公聽會，賦予一個「缺席即失權」的法律效果呢？缺席了會失權，但即使出席了也不見得會有權，這是什麼道理？

說來說去，請問在這個案子中，「缺席即失權」這個「法律效果」究竟打哪裡來的？它沒有法律依據，又似乎不合乎邏輯，難道是從嘴砲裡打出來的嗎？

別人的學生我沒有資格罵，但是很抱歉，如果是我教過的學生，我要罵。一個法律人連最基本的動作︰「去看一下法條」都沒有，竟然就隨便針對別人講錯法律的文章按讚和說中肯，那你們跟一般未受法律訓練的鄉民有什麼不一樣？

我知道你們被罵大概會心裡不舒服。但是反正我很機車也不是一天兩天了。請瞭解我愛之深，責之切。而且我真的不解︰那篇文章講別的東西你們或許可以主張自己外行，無從判斷對錯，但是他把「法條」明顯講錯你們都看不出來，那你們身為「法律人」究竟把法律念到哪裡去？



（本文作者劉宏恩為國立政治大學法學院副教授）

https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=10150695586449429

「學手語」與那篇「關於王家都更案」︰你反對有沒有用？

劉宏恩寫於 2012年3月30日 23:25 ·

我對於非常多我教過的法律系學生去「讚」成大某位大三生寫的「關於王家都更案」的文章，而且狂推它「中肯」，感到非常詫異！我要特別強調我是針對「法律系學生」。因為那位成大張同學不是學法律的，假設他沒有去看法律或是看不懂法律我覺得情有可原。但是身為法律人，請問依照大家最基本的訓練︰你們是不是至少應該把他提到的法律條文翻出來看一看，判斷一下他是不是根本弄錯了？

這位成大同學說︰王家自己要負責任，因為他們沒有積極參加公聽會，假設他們有參加，就可以「根據都市更新條例逼迫建商修改方案」---請問點讚的法律系同學，你們真的有去看都市更新條例的條文嗎？這樣的條文在哪裡？

事實上都市更新條例19條明文規定︰就算民眾參與公聽會表達反對意見，也只是提供主管機關「參考」審議而已。主管機關照樣可以維持原議。這也是為什麼高等行政法院、最高行政法院的判決再三強調「公聽會程序既僅在於聽取民眾意見，對於選定實施者或其如何擬定都市更新事業計畫並無任何拘束力，更新單元範圍內之所有權人尚不因未參與該公聽會，對其權利產生損害或重大影響」，翻成白話的意思就是「你參不參加公聽會其實根本差別不大」。（這一點其實是被告台北市政府的主張，然後被法院採納）

對於許許多多附和張同學的主張「王家自己沒有出席公聽會，因此產生失權效果」的法律系學生，可否請你們告訴我︰都更條例有哪一條規定了「不出席公聽會就失權」的法律效果？讓權利人失權難道可以沒有法律依據、不讓權利人事先可得預見的嗎？

就是因為具有爭議性才會引起社會廣泛注重
不過呢
台灣新聞都是一兩天的熱度
最多到一禮拜
大家說要修法修到最後也不了了之
連 Makiyo 翻案大家也見怪不怪了

所以啊~~修法還有得拖
或乾脆搓湯圓搓掉了

整個台灣就是被媒體掌控的
不是嗎??

失去了媒體觀注
他們也失去舞台
學生也該去唸書了
警察也該去開罰單

接下來又會出現另外一件事讓大家靠夭

Just wait and see.

推這位都市計劃科系學生的文「一刺見平」~~
（「一刺見平」是小弟我研發的新成語，跟成語一針見血相同）
也想起當初成立個人部落格目的，包括用力宣傳社福訊息、用輕鬆好懂方式讓民眾了解社會議題；再看這幾年不少有爭議的興建案，都跟開放民眾參與討論程度有限有關，也提供社會議題討論說明會訊息加掛服務。
畢竟發生這種抗爭事件，還真是「讓所有人都心碎」...

All information I quoted were from the news. I did not have any first-hand information, nor direct connection from Wang's family. I don't have any problems with different views, in fact I fully support diversity. Just digress a little bit. The ex-chancellor of UC Berkeley said "excellence through diversity" when he had the argument with the California state governor about reserving certain quota of UCB students for minority.

I cannot care less whether the major of Taipei should step down or not (even the citizens have the right to ask so). All I believe and fight for is the value of true democracy based on fairness and justice.

Please allow me end our discussion on this topic by quoting a well-known poem from the German pastor, Martin Niemoller, who first supported Hitler, later became disillusioned about the brutality of Nazi.

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

The other equally well-know statement is the poem by the Italian poet, Dante Alighieri (但丁)

The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who in times of great moral crises maintain their neutrality.
地獄裏最熾熱之處，是留給那些在出現重大道德危機時，仍要保持中立的人

OH ! Patty getting tire ! I will stop this topic and give myself more time to sense the Spring ! However, q have a very good point ! Hope this incident have a happy ending !

謝謝正反兩派的意見
這件事公說公有理,婆說婆有理
怎樣也吵不完
我也尊重大家的意見

多謝留言
兩位的英文都好強!!

^__^

It seems you have first hand doucement from Wang's family !? All my view point is base on the news ! What you mentioned that there are 200+ cases in usa is that the building owner
they took the legal action all the time to fight back. Wang's family just wasted
this 3 years to protect their rights, they just wait and see .By the way, I didn't say your views involved with the political judgement,what I said was seen from TV, how could they asked the mayor step-down because of this incidents ? It really a aproblem for Taiwan, when people not satisfied with the goverment's policy, they ask officers apologize or step-down, if this is the habit, Goverment can't function at all ! Don't feel bad people with different views !

The Wang's family had expressed many times that did not want to participate in this project. The Taipei city government has received the petition from Wang's way back. But they did not do anything. Even the department of internal affairs says the constructor can simply exclude Wang's houses so the entire project can go on without any problem. It's not like that the other 95% cannot have their own houses reconstructed if Wang's houses are excluded. They have no problems to reconstruct their houses even Wang's houses excluded from this plan. Check the satellite photo you will see that there are few other building in the same block had been excluded from this plan. The fundamental issue in this case is that Wang's family has REPEATEDLY expressed their refusal. So please don't say anything like Wang's family should have a hearing. The have done way more than that, just the city government and the constructor purposely ignore that over and over. In the meanwhile, I did not say the government can do whatever they want, in fact that's what I keep telling you the government CANNOT do whatever they want under such a highly controversial and potentially unconstitutional case. As I mentioned in my previous response, currently there are more than 200+ cases involving serious arguments. You know what? I can assure you that the constructor can get any houses they want if the case of Wang's family cannot be rectified. One last thing, please don't imply that my response involves any political judgement, I did not mention anything about politics until you brought this up in your last response. Also, check the "receipt" thing I mentioned in my previous mail. You will be surprised what you will find out. One last word, if you are in US now you can find tons of examples showing that the constructors back off when the house owners do not want to sell their houses. This is a matter of the protection of free will, which is clearly specified in the constitution.

My point is, Wang’s family should know what impacts that already
brought to another 95% who waiting and waiting for over past 3 years. If they took this issues seriously from the beginning, such as submit the formal petition and raised all their opinions
in the meeting, this incident can be avoided ! When facing the same issues, how people in USA do? they will hold the hearing and discuss openly, Wang’s family should do so, from the news, they didn’t attend the meeting during past 3 years, how other 95% thought ? they definitely thought they give up (or don’t care) their originial plan and accept the new plan. For example, during the auction, if no one propo a new price, the auctioner will treat that the set-price have been approved. In this case, city government did all the procedure legally, just not prefect.
I disagree what you said that the government can do whatever
they want ( I strongly believe in my native county). I hope this incident better not involved with too much policial judgement.
In USA, the court will put the name on the black list if someone have been called for several times and did not make any appearance. I can’t imagine Wang’s family didn’t receive any meeting notification during this past 3 years! The ‘Law’
What I mentioned is the law that already established and undergoing; however, the‘Health insurance’ in USA have not been
used so far, that why people can still challenge !

Chris,

You totally miss the whole point. The point is that the constructor can do whatever they want to get the so-called 80 (or whatever) percentage. The Wang's family had expressed clearly that they do not want to participate this plan. They have not even been notified. The constructor showed the "receipt" of the registered mail singed by a person who is not even a Wang's family member. In other words, they are not legally notified. The process of notification is not completed. I have lived in US for a very long time. I know the judicial system very well. The court cannot ask anyone to show up if they that person has not been officially notified. If you have been following the news for a while, you should have known that there are some other building which had been excluded from this plan. Besides, there is an argument that this law is simply unconstitutional. Up to this time, there are more than 200+ cases involving serious arguments. If the constructor can keep doing this, eventually they can take anyone's home, including yours and mine. If you are in the US now, you should know that there is a huge debate going on in the supreme court that whether the government can
force people (through the law, of course) to purchase insurance. What if the legislative makes a law saying that any Ph.D. degree holder does
not need to pay tax? I don't mean that we don't need to follow the law we don't like. But, in this case, it is not the issue of following the
law, it is the issue that can the government do whatever they want under such a highly controversial and unconstitutional case? I don't think so.

So, how about other 95% ? they have been forced to leave their home for over 3 years ! Wang's family should speak out their concerns and opinions
in every meeting. Everyone should
following the game rule, the game rule
in this country is so called 'Law', If you don't following the law, can you imagine what a mess in this society ? By the way, I don't think they will lost 20M unless they won't
receice any penny !(Taiwan is not communist country) q, maybe you got
a wrong information !
p.s. I USA, if you didn't appear in
the court, it means you give up your rights ! for this reason, I will put the blames on every parties instead of all the blame on city goverment !

Don't forget how much money Wang's family will lose. I don't think you will be
happy if you will lose 20 million dollars. Besides, their house is very OK. The bottom line is they have every bit of right to keep their home. The constructor can simply exclude Wang's houses, which had been done in many other cases in other cities. It is NOT RIGHT to assume you will say yes if I did not hear from you. It is simply unconstitutional. Don't say that's what the law says. Communist countries like China and North Korea also have laws - laws that they can use to kill anyone they don't like, laws that they can kick you out of your home anytime they want. You are an educated person. You should know and do better than that.

要換做是我家
我會歡迎收編
因為住過舊房子
深知舊房子漏水之苦

假如王家真的愛自己的房子
就要在一開始挺身保護
而不是被建商耍

現在說這些都來不及了
算是有喚起大家對都市更新法的正視

You just don't care as long as not your home!

如果一開始建商聽進王家不肯都更的意見，
不要把王家納入都更範圍就好了，
就現有同意戶進行都更也行得通。
但牠就是吃定王家要少數服從多數決-不懂法律的弱點。(攤手)

這件事情說實在王家與其他30多戶都是受害者
建商很可惡
但在商言商也無不可
市府執行公權力手段或許粗暴...但依法行政是確實
那些學生我倒是蠻討厭的
四處抗議...就連樂生療養院事件也是
搞得新莊線無法全線通車
當地住戶也是抱怨連連
sorry...離題了
我要說得是都市更新有其必要性
少數服從多數也很正當&民主
今日若不這樣做
以後根本不會有任何一件都更案能完成
任何一戶反對就卡死了
公權力也無法執行
其實民主並沒有倒退
因為民主不只講人權
也講多數決之事

美女，文章借我引用吧！謝謝。

要不是看了Patty PO這一篇文章
真的會被媒體局勢搞得一面倒
事情 原來還是要多方面去探討瞭解才能下言論(但也非定論, 因為每個人的立場觀點不同)
這一篇超想轉入FB的
但怕引發非議 就罷了
有這樣的文章給一個公正還原整個過程與法律規章 真的很讚

前幾天看著FB大家狂轉PO並與國外的CASE做對比，
看著大家一面倒…

事情是沒辦法看單一面向的…
需要真正深入去關心了解再來定奪也不晚

是呀!!
這也是我這兩天看了報導後的想法

釘子戶嘴上喊民主民主
卻沒有想
少數服從多數也是民主的一部份!!
其他 95%的多數已經等了三年了
王家吵著政府給他公道
那王家也要給那些人公道嗎?? -.-"