| 摘要: | 依據憲法第83條規定，公務人員保障事項為我國考試院主管事項之一，往昔我國因繼受特別權力關係理論，公務人員與國家之間的關係被認定為公法上之勤務關係，公務人員之於國家除義務不確定、地位不對等且不得提起行政訴訟。我國缺乏一個完整的公務人員保障法制體系，相關權利救濟制度乃散見於公務人員任用法、考績法、保險法及俸給法等個別法律。但隨者二次世大戰後，各國莫不致力實踐法治國原則，我國司法院大法官解釋實務乃順應此一世界潮流，自釋字第187號解釋起陸續作成多則解釋，逐步揚棄「特別權力關係」理論，並認為公務人員與國家之間為「公法上職務關係」，公務人員權益如受不利處分，得提起行政訴訟。茲以公務人員權利保障逐漸獲致重視，迄至民國85年制定公布「公務人員保障法」，並於考試院下設主管機關「公務人員保障暨培訓委員會」專責辦理公務人員保障及培訓事項，嗣於民國92年大幅修正公務人員保障法，建構「復審」及「申訴、再申訴」兩種救濟管道，除提升公務人員之權利地位外，並透過此一救濟體系，完備我國行政救濟制度。
本研究分為緒論、我國公務人員保障法制概述、先進國家之公務人員保障法制、我國公務人員保障法制所面臨的問題與評析、結論與建議等五章，從現行法制規定出發，透過文獻資料蒐集進行分析，並透過文官保障與公務人員行政中立法之關連性，闡述公務人員權益保護之重要性。另與先進國家的相關公務人員法制進行比較，期待截長補短，完備我國現行制度。本研究並以現行保訓會受理的保障事件案例進行評析與建議，最後，將研究所獲致之心得呈現在結論與建議，期盼能使現行法制更趨完備，並能作為未來主管機關研修公務人員保障法時之重要參據，有所助益。
The 83rd Article of the Constitution stipulates matters concerning the protection of civil service are one of the main responsibilities of the Examination Yuan. In the past, Taiwan followed the Theory of Special Power Relations according to which the relationship between civil service and the state, which was identified legally as the Agency Served. As to administrative litigation, since this was not included in the civil service’s official duties and because of the asymmetry between the civil service and the state, it was unlawful for civil service to initiate administrative litigation. The problem was that Taiwan lacked an overall Civil Service Protection Act. The related provisions to safeguard public functionary rights were dispersed under such various other laws as the Civil Service Employment Act, the Merit of Performance Act, the Insurance Act, the Remuneration Act, etc.
In the Postwar period, however, many countries around the world made efforts to implement the principles of Constitutional State. In Taiwan, the Grand Justices of the Judicial Yuan strove to follow this global trend in their interpretations of the law. Starting with interpretation 187, they wrote a series of interpretations that developed into a multi-principled body of interpretations that broke through and pushed aside the old Theory of Special Power Relations. The Grand Justices held that in the relationship between civil service and the state, even though legally under the Agency Served, if civil service were to suffer an adverse Administrative Adjudication, he or she should initiate Administrative Litigation. This reflected that the protection of civil service rights was increasingly being taken seriously. In 1996, this trend culminated with the passage of the “Civil Service Protection Act,” which designated the Examination Yuan as the Agency responsible to form the “Public Functionary Protection and Training Committee” and be solely responsible for managing all matters concerning the protection and training of public functionaries. Pursuant to the 2003 general reform of the Civil Service Protection Act, two channels were designated for public functionaries seeking restitution: “Deliberation Cases” and “Appeal” and “Re-appeal Cases. ” Besides upgrading the status of civil service rights, the reform provided a system for seeking relief and thus completed Taiwan’s system for seeking administrative relief.
The presents study divides into 1) an introduction, 2) an overview of Taiwan’s Civil Service Protection Act, with 3) comparison to the public functionary protection systems of advanced countries, 4) questions and critical discussion of Taiwan’s Civil Service Protection Act, and 5) conclusions and suggestions. This study commences from the present administrative law system, carries out analyses of selected documents and information, exxamines the series of Civil Service Protection Act and public functionaries Administrative Neutrality Act, and finally describes the importance of protecting the civil service rights and interests. Moreover, by comparing the civil service legal systems of Taiwan and the advanced countries, the study identifies ways in which to trim the excesses and fill in the shortcomings of Taiwan’s system to make it more perfect.
The focus on the present study is to analyze some protection cases of the “Civil Service Protection and Training Committee” and make suggestions. Finally, the insights and perspectives derived through this study are presented in the conclusions and suggestions section.The author hopes that these insights and suggestions will one day be useful for improving the current administrative law system to make it even more complete. Indeed, it is hoped that the present study will serve as an important reference and aid when government agencies undertake future studies and reform of Civil Service Protection Act. |
