Each department of ports corporation, in Taiwan, functions both harbor managing and public authority enforcing. To get more flexibility in harbor managing, MOTC (Ministery Of Transportation and Communication, R.O.C) set up “Taiwan International Ports Corporation” by separation of enterprise from government, which is specialized in ports management. While equipped with the verdict procedure of “Transportation Infrastructure in Commercial Port”, The Commercial Port Law has failed to rule the effective of the project. And there might be some conflicts between projects when “Urban Planning”, “Environmental Impact Assessment”, “local self-government functions” are encountered.
The initial draft of “Administrative Procedure Act, R.O.C” planned to introduce plan-finalizing procedure to allow centralization in legalizing project. With the failure of massive sequential lawmaking procedure, the government has a whole new horizon in this brand-new administrative behavior. Thence, this research proposes problems of constructing commercial port, clarifies the doubts in administrative planning procedure by probing into the legal nature、the legal theory, plan-finalizing procedure and efficacy, and referring to German administrative planning and tries to resolve the conflicts of port construction by enforcing and law-making.
Due to administrative efficiency in legalizing port construction plan, we suggest to adopt the first phase, feasibility permit, and the second phase, detailed planning permit. To resolve the legalizing problems in administrative plan, we suggest to demarcate the harbor land as “Commercial Port Specialied Lands”in the short-term, and set the effect of centralization in organic act in the mid-term. Last but not the least, complete the regulations of administrative planning in Administrative Procedure Act, set up a standard procedure in The Commercial Port Law in the long-term.