2010年6月3日，行政院公民投票審議委員會駁回台灣圑結聯 盟的ECFA公投提案。由於公審會的駁回理由，攸關公投法如何解 釋的問題，因此筆者認為，欲釐清這次事件的爭議關鍵，勢必得先回 溯探討公投制度在我國憲法架構之下的定位，才能進一步瞭解公投法 相關規定的意義何在。有鑑於此，本文旨從憲法的角度出發，透過觀 察我國憲法所建構的民主實踐模式，分析我國憲法如何鋪陳直接民主 與間接民主的關係。本文將指出，由於我國憲法預設了一套支持直 接民主與間接民主並存，並且讓直接民主得以有效制衡間接民主的架 構，因此公投法的規範目的，恰恰在於協助實現直接民主對間接民主 的制衡。根據此等對公投法規範目的的認知，本文將主張，面對這次 公投法解釋的爭議，解決之道並非如公審會所主張的「反面推論」， 而應該在認定法律規範漏洞存在的前提之下，運用「類推適用」的方 式，安置「不同意者佔多數」之公投結果的法律效果。

On June 3, 2010, the Referendum Commission of the Executive Yuan voted against the Taiwan Solidarity Union proposal of ECFA referendum based on the reason that the proposal failed to meet the requirements of the Referendum Law. This essay aims to examine the rejection decision of the Referendum Commission, focusing especially on the debates regarding the interpretation of the Referendum Law. Through constitutional as well as methodological analysis, I argue that, since the Referendum Law purports to realize an effective direct democracy, which is expressly guaranteed in our constitutional law, the interpretation of its related provisions should take this normative purpose into consideration. This essay thereby reaches the conclusion that the ECFA referendum case should be resolved on the methodological basis of gap-filling and analogical reasoning.