公務員勇於揭弊卻被免職 聲請釋憲遭裁定不 - 公職
By Rae
at 2022-06-04T00:36
at 2022-06-04T00:36
Table of Contents
※ [本文轉錄自 Gossiping 看板 #1YcXKqeL ]
作者: Articuno (水噹噹) 看板: Gossiping
標題: [新聞] 公務員勇於揭弊卻被免職 聲請釋憲遭裁定不
時間: Fri Jun 3 22:05:36 2022
公務員勇於揭弊卻被免職 聲請釋憲遭裁定不受理
【大紀元2022年06月02日訊】(大紀元記者袁世鋼新竹報導)新竹縣家畜疾病防治所前技
士戴立紳2012年底向廉政署揭發長官貪汙案並自首,法官雖判他免刑,但因免刑屬「有罪
確定」,2016年遭新竹縣政府依《公務人員任用法》核定免職且永不任用。義務律師團認
為該法侵害吹哨者服公職權而聲請釋憲,但憲法法庭27日裁定不受理。
民間司法改革基金會指出,戴立紳於2005至2016年間任職於新竹縣家畜疾病防治所,因不
堪遭長官不斷要求作假帳、公費私用而於2012年底透過政風室向法務部廉政署揭發此案並
自首,提出有力的證據協助檢警調查;法官審酌他不懼壓力勇於檢舉,因此免除他個人的
刑責,但新竹縣政府2016年卻依此有罪確定的免刑判決將他免職、永不任用。
司改會表示,為鼓勵體制內的人勇於揭發弊案,《貪污治罪條例》中設計有讓法官能夠對
揭弊者「減輕或免刑」的規定,而「免刑」是「有罪判決」的一種,只是免除「刑之執行
」,但《公務人員任用法》卻規定「曾服公務且有貪污行為,經有罪判決確定者」就應免
職且不得再任用,無疑是變相懲罰揭弊者,也違反比例原則、侵害人民服公職的權利。
戴立紳窮盡救濟手段後,義務律師團2018年聲請釋憲,主張《公務人員任用法》第28條第
1項第4款及第2項前段,對公務員吹哨者保護範圍適用部分違憲,應立即失效。
憲法法定審理認為,此案為《憲法訴訟法》修正施行前尚未終結的案件,應依修正施行前
的《司法院大法官審理案件法》決定是否受理;依該法規定,若人民、法人或政黨對於非
《憲法》所保障的權利遭受不法侵害時,不得對有牴觸《憲法》疑慮的確定終局裁判所適
用的法律或命令聲請釋憲。
然而,憲法法庭指出,戴立紳案的釋憲申請書並未具體說明《公務人員任用法》第28條第
1項第4款及第2項前段究竟如何侵害《憲法》所保障的服公職權,以及同法未就公務員的
有罪判決態樣予以區分、未排除公務員吹哨者一律予以適用等問題究竟如何牴觸《憲法》
比例原則或平等原則,因此裁定不受理。
對此,司改會強調,無論是《公務人員任用法》或是延宕許久的「揭弊者保護法」草案等
其他法律,迄今均未對此不公平的制度完成相對應的立法改良,令人遺憾。雖然本案在15
名大法官中以一票之差遭憲法法庭裁定不受理,但仍有5位大法官提出2份不同意見書,指
出本案具備《憲法》上原則重要性,屬應討論的議題。
責任編輯:呂美琪
https://www.epochtimes.com/b5/22/6/2/n13751045.htm
--
《大紀元時報》 X 《奇異博士2:失控多重宇宙》
https://i.epochtimes.com/assets/uploads/2022/05/id13725924-FotoJet.jpg
兩行小字 「歷史巨變在眼前 指路真相大紀元」
--
作者: Articuno (水噹噹) 看板: Gossiping
標題: [新聞] 公務員勇於揭弊卻被免職 聲請釋憲遭裁定不
時間: Fri Jun 3 22:05:36 2022
公務員勇於揭弊卻被免職 聲請釋憲遭裁定不受理
【大紀元2022年06月02日訊】(大紀元記者袁世鋼新竹報導)新竹縣家畜疾病防治所前技
士戴立紳2012年底向廉政署揭發長官貪汙案並自首,法官雖判他免刑,但因免刑屬「有罪
確定」,2016年遭新竹縣政府依《公務人員任用法》核定免職且永不任用。義務律師團認
為該法侵害吹哨者服公職權而聲請釋憲,但憲法法庭27日裁定不受理。
民間司法改革基金會指出,戴立紳於2005至2016年間任職於新竹縣家畜疾病防治所,因不
堪遭長官不斷要求作假帳、公費私用而於2012年底透過政風室向法務部廉政署揭發此案並
自首,提出有力的證據協助檢警調查;法官審酌他不懼壓力勇於檢舉,因此免除他個人的
刑責,但新竹縣政府2016年卻依此有罪確定的免刑判決將他免職、永不任用。
司改會表示,為鼓勵體制內的人勇於揭發弊案,《貪污治罪條例》中設計有讓法官能夠對
揭弊者「減輕或免刑」的規定,而「免刑」是「有罪判決」的一種,只是免除「刑之執行
」,但《公務人員任用法》卻規定「曾服公務且有貪污行為,經有罪判決確定者」就應免
職且不得再任用,無疑是變相懲罰揭弊者,也違反比例原則、侵害人民服公職的權利。
戴立紳窮盡救濟手段後,義務律師團2018年聲請釋憲,主張《公務人員任用法》第28條第
1項第4款及第2項前段,對公務員吹哨者保護範圍適用部分違憲,應立即失效。
憲法法定審理認為,此案為《憲法訴訟法》修正施行前尚未終結的案件,應依修正施行前
的《司法院大法官審理案件法》決定是否受理;依該法規定,若人民、法人或政黨對於非
《憲法》所保障的權利遭受不法侵害時,不得對有牴觸《憲法》疑慮的確定終局裁判所適
用的法律或命令聲請釋憲。
然而,憲法法庭指出,戴立紳案的釋憲申請書並未具體說明《公務人員任用法》第28條第
1項第4款及第2項前段究竟如何侵害《憲法》所保障的服公職權,以及同法未就公務員的
有罪判決態樣予以區分、未排除公務員吹哨者一律予以適用等問題究竟如何牴觸《憲法》
比例原則或平等原則,因此裁定不受理。
對此,司改會強調,無論是《公務人員任用法》或是延宕許久的「揭弊者保護法」草案等
其他法律,迄今均未對此不公平的制度完成相對應的立法改良,令人遺憾。雖然本案在15
名大法官中以一票之差遭憲法法庭裁定不受理,但仍有5位大法官提出2份不同意見書,指
出本案具備《憲法》上原則重要性,屬應討論的議題。
責任編輯:呂美琪
https://www.epochtimes.com/b5/22/6/2/n13751045.htm
--
《大紀元時報》 X 《奇異博士2:失控多重宇宙》
https://i.epochtimes.com/assets/uploads/2022/05/id13725924-FotoJet.jpg
兩行小字 「歷史巨變在眼前 指路真相大紀元」
--
Tags:
公職
All Comments
By Hamiltion
at 2022-06-07T08:16
at 2022-06-07T08:16
By Frederica
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Hamiltion
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Skylar DavisLinda
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Quintina
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Harry
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Jessica
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Selena
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Michael
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Sandy
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Yuri
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Zenobia
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Michael
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Odelette
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Puput
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Madame
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Lily
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Damian
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Frederic
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Bethany
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Zenobia
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Bethany
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Zora
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Ursula
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Jack
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Selena
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Hamiltion
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Steve
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Frederic
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Annie
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Agatha
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Dinah
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Skylar DavisLinda
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Edith
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Carol
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Skylar DavisLinda
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Belly
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Harry
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Skylar Davis
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Candice
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Dora
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Andrew
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Skylar Davis
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Megan
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Steve
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Charlie
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Dora
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Madame
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Zora
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Michael
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Queena
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Linda
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Skylar DavisLinda
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Agatha
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Ina
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Genevieve
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Jake
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Kumar
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Oscar
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Tom
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Kyle
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Skylar DavisLinda
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Heather
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Eden
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Jessica
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Yuri
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Tracy
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Hedy
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Michael
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Mia
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Puput
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Ida
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Ethan
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Iris
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Elizabeth
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Connor
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Daniel
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Liam
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Donna
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Wallis
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Lydia
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Mason
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Selena
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Zora
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Steve
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Frederic
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Lucy
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Leila
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Regina
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Daph Bay
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Charlotte
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Agatha
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Daph Bay
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Olive
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By John
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Sandy
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Irma
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Lauren
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
By Charlie
at 2022-06-08T12:32
at 2022-06-08T12:32
By Charlotte
at 2022-06-05T04:53
at 2022-06-05T04:53
Related Posts
大法官不受理戴立紳案 司改會:錯失保護
By Andy
at 2022-06-03T13:31
at 2022-06-03T13:31
請問地檢署人事工作
By Andrew
at 2022-06-02T20:02
at 2022-06-02T20:02
立院三讀!公務員每日辦公8小時 假日可
By Isla
at 2022-06-02T18:01
at 2022-06-02T18:01
新北地檢錄事職位?
By Olivia
at 2022-06-02T15:47
at 2022-06-02T15:47
事求人履歷能不全部公開給徵人機關嗎?
By Jake
at 2022-06-02T13:49
at 2022-06-02T13:49