| 摘要: | 司法院大法官、專家學者、立法委員、實務派、現職及退休公務人員、國民皆對於公務員之獎勵及懲罰投以莫大之關注，實務及法律學界主要以憲法第16條訴訟權之保障，有權利即有救濟之法理出發，國民不應具備某種特殊身分，諸如:軍人、學生、公務員身分，而剝奪其救濟之機會，公務人員考績法部分統計至民國96年已歷經9次修正，皆針對現職公務人員權利義務要項修正，本論文將於第二章說明現職公務人員於考核時(平時考核、另予考績、年終考績)獎勵懲處時有所依據，以符合法治國原則中之法律保留原則；公務員懲戒法部分統計至民國109年已歷經7次修正，近一期修正為民國109年6月10日，針對公務員懲戒委員會正名為「公務員懲戒法院」、建立一級二審制度、防止搶退漏洞、判決金錢給付義務明訂執行期間、搭配一級二審修正再審制度，本論文將於第三章說明現職及非現職公務人員應受懲戒責任、具備懲戒事由時，懲戒判決之種類、應對之效果及權利救濟於以闡述，並說明德國聯邦公務員懲戒制度於西元2002大幅修正，內容包括新舊懲戒制度、聯邦公務員法懲戒發動事由、廢除懲戒檢察官與懲戒法院及審級制度，與我國公務員懲戒相互比較，並分析五則司法懲戒判決，主要以新法施行前及後之判決，端視懲戒法院程序運作模式、當事人之懲戒責任及應對之效果。
國家與公務員之關係，因德國學說導入特別權力關係，時空背景因素有其重要性，當時國家正處於經濟積極發展中之狀態，公務員為國家基礎建立、穩定、發展經濟具備重要基礎性，進而穩固了整體社會，當時特別注重公務紀律及團結一致，限制公務員告國家，主要以行政一體性為立論基礎，國家與公務員結合為一體，邏輯上應無自己告自己之矛盾現象，惟最早司法院釋字第187號解釋直至第785號解釋已有相當程度瓦解特別權力關係，此理論已無法源基礎及無法通過法律保留原則之檢驗，國家與公務員之關係正式轉為公法上職務關係，國家與公務員之關係展開有別以往之面貌，身為公務員對於獎懲及紀律規範應有明確規範，分別適用公務人員考績法及公務員懲戒法，由司法院釋字第187號解釋乃近期釋字第785號解釋，至本文主要對於公務人員考績法及公務員懲戒法研究其實務運作上應如何運行及兩者間之緊張關係探討，於法治層面應如何處理為妥適。
Justices of Constitutional Court, Judicial Yuan, jurisconsult, legislators and civil servant all paid great attention to the rewards and punishments of civil servants. Article 16:“The people shall have the right of presenting petitions, lodging complaints, or instituting legal proceedings. ” Citizens should not have some special status to lose the right of instituting legal proceedings . According to the statistics of the Civil Service Performance Evaluation Act, there have been nine amendments to the Republic of China in 1996, all of which have been revised for the rights and obligations of current civil servants. The second chapter of this paper will explain the basis for rewards and punishments of current servants during assessment including year-end performance appraisal, usually performance appraisal. According to the statistics of the Civil Service Discipline Act, there have been seven amendments to the Republic of China in 2020. This paper will explain in Chapter three that current and non-current servants shall be subject to disciplinary responsibilities, when they have disciplinary reasons, the types of disciplinary judgments, the effects of response, and the relief of rights. This paper will explain in Chapter three about the German federal civil servants' punishment system was greatly revised in 2002. Comparison of German System and Republic of China about Administrative and Judicial Punishment. This paper will explain five judgment of Disciplinary Court.
The relationship between the country and civil servants that is Job relations in public law. Constitutional Court Republic of China Reporter: Interpretations No.187 that ‘s first established the country and civil servants that ‘s Job relations in public law. Until Interpretation No. 785, special power relationship (besonderes Gewaltverhältnis) should not be used anymore. This theory has failed to source its basis and cannot pass the test of Statutory reservation. The relationship between the state and civil servants different from the past. This article mainly discusses about the Civil Service Performance Evaluation Act and the statistics of the Civil Service Discipline Act. |
