影響政治 vs.干涉政治：台灣遊說制度的解剖
石振國
《摘要》
在多元民主社會中，遊說不但是公民表達意見與反應需求的正當管道，也具有提供立法輔助的功能，但其也衍生出接近管道不平等等令人憂心的問題，因之，如何透過建置良善的遊說制度，使其在影響政治與干涉政治之間取得平衡，實為攸關民主有效運作的重要課題。本文應用理論導向評估的架構，分別對我國遊說法的建置內涵、執行環境與結果進行評估，發現遊說法在立法意旨與相關規範，如：遊說者強制登記、遊說紀錄公開、旋轉門的禁止、違法遊說的重罰等規定，均屬進步性的立法，頗值得肯定。惟在遊說者所涉範圍的界定與執行機關的誘因機制設計上仍有所缺漏，極可能成為滋生違法遊說的溫床。再就遊說法的執行環境而言，因現行遊說法採機關分散執行設計，在主管機關缺乏強有力執行監督的情況下，欠缺達致良善治理網絡所需的有效安排，復以強制性的執行模式致使標的團體缺乏主動順服的動機，制度本身又無法引進多元公民團體參與的機制。凡此這些執行環境上的不利因素，均可能導致遊說法的美意無法落實。再據結果評估來觀察，主管機關有心無力、資訊公開無法確實到位、遊說者不願配合、執行機關無法移送違法行為、委託遊說又非容易接近等問題，恰說明處置內容雖然完善，然在缺乏有力執行環境的配合下，要達到遊說法所揭櫫的崇高目標恐非易事。針對前述評估結果，本文亦提供部分政策建議，以做為未來修法參考。
[關鍵詞]：遊說、遊說法、理論導向評估
Influencing Politics vs. Intervening Politics: The Anatomy of Lobbying Institution in Taiwan
Chen-Kuo Shih
Abstract
In a democratic society, lobbying is not only a channel for citizens to express their opinions and demands, but it also has the function of legislative subsidy. However, it has also created the problem of unequal accessibility owing to the unhealthy implementation environment. In order to create a balance between influencing politics and intervening politics, establishing a holistic lobbying system is an important issue of effective operation of democracy. This paper applies theory-driven evaluation to evaluate the content, implementation environment and outcome of the Lobbying Act in Taiwan. Based on this evaluation, the paper finds that legislative goals and relevant rules, such as the enforcement of lobbyist registration, disclosure of lobbying records, prohibition of “revolving-door” governing the relations between lobbyists and former public officials and severe punishment regulations of illegal lobbying, are very progressive and constructive. However, a vague definition of lobbying and a lack of incentives for government institutions to implement relevant regulations may induce illegal lobbying. As regard to the evaluation of implementation environment, target groups did not have the willingness to comply with related regulations owing to the fact that diversified government bodies are given the mandate to implement the Act and yet none has the power of oversight; there are no effective arrangements of good network governance. Finally, the goals of information disclosure, compliance of lobbyists and punishment of illegal lobbying were not achieved according to the outcome evaluation. Some policy suggestions were provided against the flaws of the Lobbying Act.
Keywords: lobbying, Lobbying Act, theory-driven evaluation