2014 年3 月18 日臺灣中華民國立法院遭到反對中國國民黨立法委員草率通過〈海峽兩岸服務貿易協議〉審查程序的學生以及公民占領大會議場，隨即展開長達23 天的大型公民運動，此繼野百合學生運動後的最大一波反政府學生示威，凸顯臺灣人民在兩岸經濟整合急速推進中，對於能否確保臺灣維持現狀的擔憂，亦隱含第二次政黨輪替後，臺灣青年對於政府處理經濟發展無能的怨懟，以及現行臺灣憲政體制關於制衡一黨獨大的無力，因而，太陽花學生運動的主要訴求之一即為召開公民憲政會議，期望訴諸公民社會一同討論憲政改革。街頭抗議人潮退散後，臺灣在野陣營中的最大黨民主進步黨前後兩任黨主席蘇貞昌、蔡英文陸續倡議憲政改革，衡諸目前國民黨執政失能以及貪腐案件頻傳，再度政黨輪替並非不可能，然而，有鑒於第一次政黨輪替所形成的朝野對立，以及國民黨完全執政後依然出現的國家領導危機，在在顯示當前臺灣踐行憲政主義的不彰，關乎臺灣前途的重大事務，又因〈公民投票法〉的限制而壓迫倡議者或挑戰政府政策者，縱使臺灣人民不得不憑藉物理實力癱瘓政府部門，或者聚眾抗議爭取政策參與權有其正當性，終非解決憲政爭議之道。展望2016年臺灣總統、立法委員選舉，憲政改革極有可能成為在野陣營的政見，進入政治議程進行論辯。本文因以擬就民進黨所倡議的憲政改革藍圖進行介紹，並將從深化兩岸和平視角的角度探討其效益，期望拋磚引玉，引起更多對於臺灣憲改的關注與討論。

The Legislative Yuan’s chamber was occupied by a coalition of students and civic groups that came to a head on March 18 and April 10, 2014, for protesting the passing of the Cross-Strait Service Trade Agreement by the ruling party Kuomintang at the legislature without clause-by-clause review. The Sunflower Student Movement, the biggest student anti-government protest after the Wild Lily Movement in 1990, highlighted Taiwanese people’s concern whether or not Taiwan can maintain the status quo in the rapid cross-strait economic integration. It also implies Taiwan youth’s resentment towards the Kuomintang government’s inability of handling Taiwan’s economic development after the second regime alteration and the dysfunction of the current constitutional check and balance mechanism for the one-party dominance system. Hence, one of the appeals of the Sunflower Student Movement was to call the civil society to open a civil constitutional conference for discussing the issues of constitutional reform. After the protesting street crowds receding, Su Tseng-chang and Tsai Ing-wen, the two chairmen of the Democratic Progressive Party proposed constitutional reform in succession. Considering the disability and corruption of the Kuomintang administration, it is possible to alter the ruling party again. However, the deadlock of the government and its opposition since the first regime alternation and the Kuomintang’s leadership crisis after it took power for a certain period of time have represented the dysfunction of constitutionalism in Taiwan. Moreover, the Referendum Act ridiculously restricts advocates and critics of referendum to initiate a public deliberation and determination of affairs related to Taiwan’s future, which invokes many political dissidents and mass appealing to physical forces to paralyze different sections of the government and the multitude to protest for their participatory rights of policymaking, it is not a legitimate way to resolve constitutional issues after all. Looking ahead the pupular election of president and legislators, the issues of constitutional reform is very likely to become the political views of the opposition and will be debated in its oncoming political agenda.