公務員關係中行政處分之認定

受到特別權力關係理論的影響，我國公務員關係中行政處分之認定一直有其特別的認定方式，縱使公務員關係有其特殊性，但行之有年所謂對公務員權益有重大影響之判斷標準，是否符合法定行政處分之要件，一直未被釐清與探討，因此，本文嘗試從對德國與我國實務與理論之觀察，說明在公務員關係中，行政處分應如何加以認定。同時，對於行政訴訟類型已趨完備時，對於因行政處分或非行政處分對公務員權利所造成的侵害，應如何提起司法救濟，亦加以論述，期使公務員受到完整而充分的司法保障。基本上，因行政訴訟並不以行政處分存在為前提，本文認為我國應跳脫「有行政處分，始有權利保護」之思維方式，在此思考下，公務員關係中之行政處分始能還原其應有面貌，不致於過於寬濫或窄化，也才能落實「有權利，即有救濟」的憲法要求。

關鍵字

特別權力關係；公務員；公務員關係；行政處分；行政訴訟；權利保護

並列摘要

In Taiwan, due to the influence of special power relation theory, there has been a particular approach to identify the administrative decision in official relation. Although the specialty of official relations exits, it remains unexplained and unaddressed whether longstanding criteria adopted, which profoundly affect officialdom's rights, fulfill the essential conditions of legal administrative decision. Therefore, this article, based on both theoretical perspectives and practical reflections of legal systems in both Germany and Taiwan, tries to explicate how to identify the administrative decision in official relation. Meanwhile, as the type for administrative litigation diversifies, the article also elaborates how to pursue the administrative remedy for damages arising from administrative or non-administrative decision in order to ensure officialdom a sound judicial safeguard. In substance, because the administrative decision is not necessarily a prerequisite for the administrative litigation, this article argues that Taiwan should abandon a thought of ”the right protection comes after the administrative decision.” With such a new mindset, the administrative decision in official relation can be properly taken. Furthermore, the appropriateness can meet the constitutional requirement pertaining to ”where there is a right, there is a remedy.”