司法院釋字第520號解釋於理由書指出：「基於法治國原則，縱令實質正當亦不可取代程序合法」，即一語道出程序正義之重要性。 民間參與公共建設具專業性、複雜性及高風險性、隔代性、利益衝突等特性，在政府與民間合作理念的推動下，法律規定模式已呈現由「條件式」的模式轉向「目的式」模式，致使政府合作對象的甄審（選）成為一種高度專業趨向之判斷，並且可能陷於「決策於未知之中」的困境。民間參與公共建設的推動上，除技術層面之實體審查標準外，實應認真思考面對決策的程序問題，藉由程序之提升，用以補足實體規範的不足。據此，有關引進民間參與公共建設之法規，甄審程序選出的最佳締約對象、最優申請案件或最優申請人「是否即屬適當」，應思考甄審（或評選）程序與組織設計，是否妥適。 本文擬由正當法律程序於美國及日本之發展出發，藉以了解其規範基礎與發展情形，並分析我國司法實務有關正當法律程序原則之解釋，理解我國對於正當法律程序之內涵與要求。其後聚焦行政實務上經常引用作為民間參與公共建設案件辦理依據之獎參條例、採購法及促參法，就其甄審、評選或評審程序與爭議處理程序檢視正當法律程序實踐情形。 本於基本權保障意旨及法律承認權利之保障，基本上本文認同至少應有一最低限度之保障（即聽證權）。至於其他要求為何？本於民間參與公共建設之興建或營運，涉及政府有限資源之分配及申請人(營業自由、契約自由)與使用者（生命、身體、財產）之基本權保障相關，應可由司法院釋字第384號解釋及釋字第709號解釋推導出「組織」要求，而其他如公正作為(迴避、禁止程序外接觸)、受告知權、說明理由及資訊公開，亦正是落實組織適法與聽證權，所不可或缺之要素。

摘 要 資訊時代下，要求國家對於人民提供資訊，係為行政程序要求公開透明化之國家重要任務。近年來，我國法制發展，主要著重在要求政府對不特定多數人公開資訊之相關法制建構。相較於此，課予行政機關於行政程序對特定人民提供資訊，無論是行政機關為單方面的資訊提供，或進一步以對話的方式提供意見的諮詢，為我國法制規範上未予關注之處。現代社會變遷下，行政任務內容朝向複雜及專業化發展，國家扮演的角色亦隨之重新定位，除了在消極方面，要求國家不得過度干預人民權利的行使外；在積極的面向上，國家負有提供人民生存照顧服務的義務。具體落實在一般行政程序當中，由於行政任務的變遷以及法規的繁雜，常使人民難於釐清之間的權益關係，除此之外，在社會行政程序中，程序相對人大多具有在資訊取得較為弱勢之特徵，為了有效落實並達成個別社會給付之目的，需透過行政機關在社會給付行政程序中，提供人民相關協助。 要求國家於行政程序中提供人民相關資訊，涉及正當行政程序在憲法上的定位。釋憲實務對於正當法律程序之發展，及對該概念所為的闡釋，說明程序在憲法上亦受到檢視。除了透過憲法明文規定之權利推導出程序的要求外，特別是在行政領域中，行政程序基本權的肯認，所能發揮人民權利保障的功能，係為近年來實務及學理上，就該權利主張之具體依據及內涵，於法制發展上關注的重心。而要求國家對個別人民提供資訊，足以作為行政程序基本權的具體內涵之一。 在法律的層次方面，基於公益的考量，課予行政機關於行政程序中踐履相關的義務，必須進一步探求系爭法規之規範意旨，透過保護規範理論的操作，探究人民是否具備主觀公權利。我國行政程序法中，並未就行政機關對人民之諮詢及提供資訊義務作一般性規定，然而，在個別社會相關專業法規當中，則存在許多課予行政機關負有諮詢及提供資訊之具體規範。對此，德國法上考量在一般行政程序中，相較於在社會行政程序中的不同需求，將行政機關之諮詢及提供資訊的內容作不同規範，甚至及於行政程序尚未開啟前之程序階段作討論。在我國未就社會給付行政程序另行規範一部專業法規的前提下，在社會給付行政程序中，說明行政機關對個別人民負擔諮詢及提供資訊義務之正當性，分別從行政程序法之一般性規定，及個別社會專業法規之規範作探討。 行政機關違反行政程序行為的法律效果，除了影響系爭行政決定作成的效力外，在國家責任制度方面，透過地位回復請求權之制度建構，俾使人民得請求回復到，如同行政機關已為正確資訊提供之程序地位，進而得為權利之行使及選擇。地位回復請求權對於人民權利保障所能發揮的功能，殊值作為未來我國相關法制度發展的思考面向。 關鍵詞：正當法律程序、正當行政程序、程序基本權、協助義務、良好行政、 諮詢、提供資訊、社會法地位回復請求權、社會行政程序、信賴保護。 / Abstract Under the information age, requiring the State to provide information to the people, is the important tasks for the procedural requirements of transparency. In recent years, the development of Taiwan’s legal system, mainly focused on asking the Government for disclosure of information to public. Compared to this, whether to ask administrative agency to provide information, further to provide advice on ways of dialogue to the specific people were not of the legal norms of the attention. Changes in modern society, the administration task definition faces complex and the specialized development. The role of the State is to reposition, except the negative side, requires that the State shall not interfere unduly with the exercise of the right of the people, on the positive side, the State have obligations to provide the life of care. Realization in general administrative procedure, due to the changes of the administrative tasks, as well as the complexity of regulations, often makes people difficult to clarify the relationship between rights and obligations. In the social administrative procedure, most people are more disadvantaged on the information obtained. In order to effectively implement and achieve social benefits purposes, asked the administrative agency to provide people to assist in the social welfare procedure. Require the State in administrative procedures to provide relevant information to the people, is related to administrative procedures in the positioning of the Constitution. Due process of law in the interpretation of the Judicial Yuan, to illustrate the procedure has also been reviewed in the Constitution. Except through the right of the Constitution provides to derive the requirements specification process, there is necessary to develop the procedural constitutional rights. Especially in administrative area, administrative practice and doctrinal in recent years, are committed to advocating the basis and content of the rights. Require the State to provide information to specific people, enough to serve as one of the content of the procedural constitutional rights. At the level of the legal aspects, based on public interest considerations, obligations of administrative agency in administrative procedures, must further explore whether people have the right of the legal norm. The Administrative Procedure Act of Taiwan, does not provide for the obligation of the administrative agency to consult and provide information to specific people. However, among the social regulations, provides that the administrative agency must provide consultation and information. In this regard, Germany considered the law of general administrative procedure, compared to the different needs in the field of social administrative procedure, provides consulting and providing information in different content, even before the stage has not yet been opened. In the case of social welfare are not standardized administrative procedures and regulations. The legitimacy of the administrative agency in social welfare procedures to provide advice and information to the people of the obligations, can be discussed separately from the general provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, and the requirements of social administrative regulations. If the administrative agency violated administrative procedures, in addition to affecting the validity of administrative decisions made. In the regime of State responsibility, through on the right to recover the procedure status, so that people will ask to return to, as administrative agency to provide correct information, for the exercise of the rights and choices, as the future development of Taiwan's legal system. Key Words：due process of law, due process of administration, the procedural constitutional rights, obligation to assist, Good Administration, consultation, information, the right to recover the procedure status, social administrative procedure, bona fide.