我國法官懲戒制度與實務案例研究－以職務法庭為懲戒處分判決之標準、步驟為中心

本文的問題意識為：決定法官懲戒處分時，有無發展一套有規則可循的客觀法則之必要？若有，應如何建構？本文認為，決定懲戒處分時，有建構一套客觀法則之必要，充分、合法地評價法官行為，以符憲法比例原則之要求，追求公平審判權。本文分析了現行法官懲戒制度，包括法官法、公務員懲戒法和實務案例，發現現行制度並無明確規定決定懲戒處分之操作標準；檢視職務法庭懲戒判決理由，亦無一套有規則可循之操作標準。因此，本文將公務員懲戒法第10條、法官法第50條第2項各種裁量因子結構化，決定流程階段化，提出一決定懲戒處分之四步框架。步驟一、將裁量因子結構化，分成「違失情節」與「一般情狀」事由，再將公務員懲戒法第10條、法官法第50條第2項各種裁量因子歸類到各該事由。步驟二、審酌各種裁量因子時賦予相同權重，依序從「違失情節事由」、「一般情狀中行為人事由」、「一般情狀中其他事由」開始評分。步驟三、將裁量因子之分數加總，依總分低至高對應到「現職法官」懲戒處分之「增強式層級順序」，得出本案之懲戒處分。步驟四、檢視該懲戒處分有無違反憲法比例原則。建議職務法庭為懲戒處分判決時，參照上開審查框架，依序審酌裁量因子，並在判決中敘明審酌步驟及理由，供外界檢視。

關鍵字

法官法；公務員懲戒法；法官懲戒處分；違失行為一體性；職務法庭；審查框架

並列摘要

The thesis intends to answer the following questions: is it necessary to develop a set of objective rules to discipline a professional judge? If such a rule is required, how should it be designed? The thesis argues that it is necessary to design a set of specific procedures to discipline a judge to evaluate judge behaviors thoroughly and legitimately, comply with the requirements of the constitutional proportionality, and pursue the right to a fair trial. The thesis investigates discipline law, including the Civil Service Discipline Act, the Judge Act, and disciplinary cases involving judges, and proposes a four-step framework for deciding a disciplinary case. After analyzing discipline law, the thesis claims that the legal system of judge disciplinary offers no objective standards. The thesis, as a result, proposes a four-step framework for developing an objective standard. Step 1: categorizing all factors in the disciplinary law into "the violation condition" and "the general condition". Step 2: assigning equal weight to all factors and scoring them in the order of "the reason for the breach," "the reason for the perpetrator in the general situation," and "the other reasons in the general situation." Step 3: summing up the scores, and subjecting to an "enhanced hierarchical order" of the disciplinary action of the "current judge" according to the scores from the lowest to the highest, to obtain the disciplinary action of this case. Step 4: reviewing whether the disciplinary action violates the principle of proportionality. It is suggested that when the disciplinary court decides on disciplinary action, it should refer to the four-step framework mentioned above, review the factors in sequence, and state the steps and reasons for external review.