從平等權觀點探討年金改革合憲性爭訟

Discussion on the Constitutionality of Pension Reform from the Perspective of Equal Rights

龎寶宏(Pao-Hung Pang)

《聯大學報》 19卷2期 (2022/12) Pp. 167-176

摘要

司法院大法官分別針對軍、公、教人員年金改革之憲法爭訟，於2019年8月23日，作成並公布釋字第781號解釋、釋字第782號解釋及釋字第783號解釋，宣告除關於退休人員再任有給職之限制規定違憲外，其餘爭點無涉或尚無違背憲法原則及憲法於人民基本權利保障之意旨。由於各號解釋關於宣告具合憲性部分之內容，其就主要爭點之析論及解釋理由，似乎仍欠缺基於平等權觀點之論述及佐證，因此本研究目的即在於從平等權觀點，探討年金改革合憲性之爭訟，特別是就法體系正義之衡平比較，針對各解釋未盡斟酌之處，予以補述。為達此研究目的，本研究先摘錄並歸納該三號解釋之爭點及審查具合憲性的理由，接著引據大法官審查時未能考量之涉及制度內及制度間公平正義的重要事實證據資訊，以探討年金改革合憲性爭訟若加入平等權因素，其解釋結果是否依然肯認本次軍公教年金改革具合憲性？本研究因此提出結論，認為關於此次軍公教年金改革合憲性爭訟，允宜更為審酌並考量該涉及退撫制度內及制度間公平正義之重要事實證據資訊。

關鍵字

平等權 ； 年金改革 ； 合憲性

並列摘要

The justices of constitutional court of Judicial Yuan respectively made and announced the Interpretation No. 781, Interpretation No. 782, and Interpretation No. 783 on August 23, 2019 against the constitutional disputes over the pension reform for military, civil servant, and teaching personnel. However, it seems that the analysis and explanation of the main issues and reasons for the interpretation are still lacking in the argument and supporting evidence based on the viewpoint of equal rights, especially the comparison of the justice of the legal system. It is the purpose of this research to make supplementary explanations for the above-mentioned explanations that have not been fully considered. To achieve the purpose of this research, this research first extracts and summarizes the disputes of the three interpretations and the reasons for the constitutionality in Section 2. Then in Section 3, it quotes important factual evidence information of fairness and justice between systems to explore the constitutionality of pension reform. If the equal rights factor is added to the lawsuit, will the interpretation result still agree that the military, civil servant, and teaching personnel's pension reform is constitutional? Finally, Section 4 puts forward the conclusions of this research, and believes that the constitutionality of the military, civil servant and teaching personnel's pension reforms should allow for more consideration and the important facts and evidence related to fairness and justice within the pension system and between the systems.

並列關鍵字

Equal Rights ； Pension Reform ； Constitutionality

參考文獻

司法院釋字第 781 號解釋 ， https://cons.judicial.gov.tw/jcc/zh-tw/jep03/show?expno=781，搜尋日期：2021年11月5日。

司法院釋字第 782 號解釋 ， https://cons.judicial.gov.tw/jcc/zh-tw/jep03/show?expno=782，搜尋日期：2021年11月5日。

司法院釋字第 783 號解釋 ， https://cons.judicial.gov.tw/jcc/zh-tw/jep03/show?expno=783，搜尋日期：2021年11月5日。

總統府國家年金改革委員會（2021），年金制度為什麼現在要改！非改不可？，https://pension.president.gov.tw/cp.aspx?n=4B4ECF469B4D0122&s=54CA3ADDDCE03F52，搜尋日期：2021年11月5日。

龎寶宏（2021），台灣年金改革獨厚在職軍職人員之研究，聯大學報，第18卷第2期，頁75-88。