兩公約施行法為我國第一次以國內立法填補因無法存放批准書所造成的問題，使得國際人權條約有國內法地位，開啟與國際人權接軌之新模式，其對於法院適用法律尤有更重大之影響。 本文認為法院應該適用《經濟社會文化權利國際公約》，且應依職權適用之。當法院未適用時，應被認為是判決違背法令，得為第三審上訴及非常上訴。而當法律與公約衝突時，應適用公約。法院亦應參考經濟社會及文化權委員會之意見。法院必須決定國內法律是否符合《經濟社會文化權利國際公約》所要求之締約國國家義務。如果法院未能妥善審視此部分，即有適用法律不當之疑慮，而得以提起第三審上訴或是非常上訴。

The Act to Implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights is the first ever domestic law to fill our country’s gap of not able to deposit the instrument of ratification and so to provide international human rights treaties domestic legal status. It grants a new model and offers great impact on courts. This essay argues that courts, according to their functions, shall apply the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, even the parties do not ask so. If courts do not apply, those judgments should be considered as against the law. When domestic laws conflict with the Covenant, the Covenant shall prevail. Courts should make reference to opinions of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Courts should decide whether domestic laws comply with obligations of contracting parties of the Covenant. If courts do not review this part, those judgments will be considered as applying laws improperly.