第一款 瑞士
瑞士是少數由立法部門職司事前實質審查的國家，因此，儘管這項機制在該國其 實僅用於憲法部分修正的創制案，本文認為仍有介紹的價值。根據瑞士聯邦憲法第139 條規定，在提案公告後18 個月內，經 10 萬有投票權人之連署，得提交憲法部分修正 的創制提案；但在投票前，聯邦政府會向聯邦議會概述其對公投內容有效性的看法573，
聯邦議會
審查提案後，
若認創制案違反國際法的強行規定（mandatory provisions of international law），應宣告其全部或部分無效574。雖然不得違反國際法強制規定之要求，與基本權違憲審查仍有一定程度落差，但 根據學者 Laurence Morel 的觀察，這項 1999 年修憲方引進的事前實質審查，仍得視 為保障少數群體權利的新機制，因為這使創制提案不得違反包括歐洲人權公約在內的 相關國際人權法規定575。不過，由於審查範疇限縮在違反強行法的情況，且強行法的 概念本身以及範圍都具有爭議性576，這高度限縮了聯邦議會否准提案的可能性577；而 且提案若未受駁回，嗣後公投通過，將沒有其他事後審查機制來檢驗其潛藏的基本權 侵害578。近年來，是否應擴大第139 條適用範圍以強化人權保障，即引發該國激烈討 論579。
573 Christmann, supra note 287, at 57.
574 The Federal Constitution of the Swiss Confederation Art 139(3):
If the initiative fails to comply with the requirements of consistency of form, and of subject matter, or if it infringes mandatory provisions of international law, the Federal Assembly shall declare it to be invalid in whole or in part.
575 Morel, supra note 58, at 523-524.
576 Christmann, supra note 287, at 56-57.
577 Morel, supra note 58, at 524.
578 Morel, supra note 58, at 524; Christmann, supra note 287, at 57.
579 吳志光（2019），〈公民投票提案的合憲性審查—以比較法的觀察及我國法制的檢討為核心〉，發表
於：《中華民國憲法學會民國108 年學術研討會—公民投票的憲法問題》，頁 7-10，社團法人中華民國
舉例來說，2008 年聯邦議會便放行了惡名昭彰的禁建清真宣禮塔公投（anti-minaret initiative），因為其認為該提案違反的國際人權規定，譬如歐洲人權公約第9 條 之宗教自由，並未達到維也納條約法公約所稱的強行國際法或絕對法（jus cogens）層 次，在另一個有關性及暴力犯罪者終身監禁的公投提案中亦然580。截至目前，聯邦議 會僅曾在反政治庇護公投中，基於其違反「不遣返原則」（non-refoulement principle）
而宣告無效581。考量到這項機制的侷限性，議會依憲法第139、139b 條提出對立提案
（counter-proposal），以及討論議案、向選民提供議題建議的軟性權能，或許對避免做 出侵害人權的政治決定而言，更加重要582。
第二款 列支敦斯登
歐洲小國列支敦斯登亦設有公投機制，該國人民可以就法律或憲法的部分或全部 發起公投583。人民創制須向行政機關提起，政府會將公投提案及有關公投之合憲性、
合條約性的評估報告一併提交議會，由議會審查提案是否符合憲法及國際條約，若有 不符合的情況，議會應宣告公投提案無效584。
另一方面，無論議會就提案合憲性做成什麼樣的審查決定，在整個創制公投過程 中、甚至就已通過生效的公投，提案人、利害關係人乃至於公民皆有權要求憲法法院 進行審查，若公投牴觸憲法或國際條約，憲法法院有權將其宣告無效585。由此可見，
在交付全民投票之前，不只議會，列支敦斯登的憲法法院也有可能事前實質介入。不
憲法學會（主辦），臺北。
580 Christmann, supra note 287, at 57.
581 Id.
582 相關介紹，See DUBOIS &FEENEY,supra note 562, at 49-50.
583 Wilfried Marxer, Minorities and Direct Democracy in Liechtenstein, in DIRECT DEMOCRACY AND
MINORITIES 168 (Wilfried Marxer ed. 2012).
584 Act of 17 July 1973 on the Exercise of Political Rights in National Affairs Art. 70b:
(1) Should initiative requests (collective or community initiatives) be submitted to the Government, it will examine whether they are in accordance with the Constitution and the existing state treaties and shall forward their report together with the submissions to the Landtag for further consideration.
(2) The Landtag shall consider the initiative request in its next session. Should it find that the initiative request is not compatible with the Constitution and the existing state treaties, it shall declare it null and void.
(3) An appeal may be filed with the Constitutional Court against a nullification from the Landtag.
585 Marxer, supra note 583, at 168.
過因爲該國議會的合憲性審查屬公投成案的必要程序，因此本文仍初步將其歸類為以
586 Referendum Law of the Republic of Lithuania Article 14:
1. The Seimas, having received a properly registered final act of the group along with the citizens’ petitions and the conclusion of the Central Electoral Committee that the submitted documents correspond to this Law, shall deliberate the issue of the date of the referendum at the next sitting of the Seimas during the session. The representatives of the referendum group shall be invited to participate in this sitting. The resolution of the Seimas on the date of calling the referendum shall be passed in accordance with the procedure set forth in the Seimas Statute, no later than within one month from the day on which the discussion issue of the date of calling the referendum has been started.
2. Should the group of experts formed in the Seimas arrives at the conclusion that the referendum text supplied in the citizens’ petition to call a referendum may not be in keeping with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania, can be the basis for not calling the referendum.
587 The Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania Article 102(1):
The Constitutional Court shall decide whether the laws and other acts of the Seimas are in conflict with the Constitution, and whether the acts of the President of the Republic and the Government are in conflict with the Constitution or laws.
The Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania Article 105(1):
The Constitutional Court shall consider and adopt decisions on whether the laws of the Republic of Lithuania or other acts adopted by the Seimas are in conflict with the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania.
588 DAINIUS ŽALIMAS, LITHUANIAN CONSTITUTIONALISM: THE PAST AND THE PRESENT 295-297 (The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania. 2017).
589 The Constitutional Court’s ruling of 11 July 2014, the Register of Legal Acts, 11-07-2014, No 10117. See Id. at 298.
定之合憲性。