公務員揭弊行為與洩密罪責之衝突與調和 ―國家實驗研究院國家太空中心案例分析

Conflict and Adaptation in Public Servants’ Whistle-blowing and Leaking Activities : An Analysis of the NSPO Case

徐念慈(Nien-Tzu Hsu)

指導教授 ： 邱榮舉

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/國家發展研究所/碩士(2011年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2011.10454

摘要

揭發弊端乃係組織成員對其內部違法、違反道德規範或不正當情事，向有能力採取有效作為之人或組織加以公開。月暈而風，礎潤則雨，弊端之發生代表著個人犯罪，象徵著組織的失靈，往往只有組織內部人員最清楚，諸如美國水門案的Wark Felt、美國恩隆案的Sherron Watkins、新海瓦斯行的林子文揭弊案。揭弊者揭露不法情事之後，對於機密事項符合洩密罪之構成要件而遭起訴，組織內部人事處分必先於法院判決而形成，造成揭弊者遭起訴並去職之雙重不利益，身陷兩難困境，為求國家重大利益，避免不法貪瀆行為虧損國庫預算，立意良善，然若勇於蒐得證物、公諸於世，將受到難以承受之人事解職、起訴等報復。
本文研究對於立法委員或媒體進行揭發之行為是否構成洩密罪，依次進行國家機密核定權責、積極與消極要件之判斷研究；太空中心揭弊案之管道乃向上級行政長官揭弊未果，進而向立法委員及媒體揭發之阻卻違法性探究，引證大法官解釋對於憲法保障獨立行使職權之機關、行政特權等領域均不得進行調查之見解，並以我國實務見解逐一解析各項要件之該當與否。阻卻違法事由則就義務衝突、期待可能性及構成要件錯誤中的客體錯誤分析太空中心洩漏國家機密案之成立、競合與衝突。
制定揭發弊端保護制之正當性界限在於僅得保障依法報備者或經檢調許可者，且不保障私人違法取證。經由比較英國、美國與紐西蘭等民主先進國家之制度後，建構我國揭弊保護機制以調和二者衝突，使揭弊者免於洩密罪責，以合理確信標準認定弊案之性質，進行揭弊與報復之關連性判斷，解析我國乃因無明文曉諭揭弊者應循之管道，致不黯司法審判程序之揭弊者，選擇以向媒體與立法委員爆料取得立即見效之管道進行揭發。同時亦因揭弊管道不明，導致義務衝突及他項阻卻違法事由亦甚難主張。
本文肯認就揭弊者對於立法委員或媒體揭弊所生之衝突應有制訂保護機制予以除罪化之正當性及必要性。強化肅清貪瀆機制之公正與獨立，將可提升政府之廉潔度與效能，亦合於國家倡廉反貪政策之所需。

關鍵字

公益揭發 ； 機密 ； 弊案 ； 揭發弊端 ； 揭弊者 ； 檢舉 ； 報復 ； 除罪化 ； 洩密

並列摘要

Abstract
Whistle-blowing, literally means disclosures reported to a supervising individual or a group of people who are rightful to intervene. The behavior is usually made by a crew from certain organizations, who find his associating team might has committed crimes, or doing something which is beyond the tolerance of social moralities and expectations. An old Chinese old proverb goes “Halo, but the wind, the rain from foundation”. It means there is nothing comes from nothing. Illegal abuse of an individual, however, is symbolically indicating the malfunction of the team, and these kinds of malfunctions are firstly observed by the insiders. Those supported cases are never few, for example, Wark Felt in the case of Watergate, and Sherron Watkins in the case of Enron.
After the exposing really takes place, the Whistle-blower never becomes a hero afterwards. Oppositely, they would often face dilemmas. One is that they are often charged of being liable to criminal prosecution by the events they exposed. Another matter was occurred in the team, whilst the judgment made by the personal office in a team is always earlier than the court. Hence, as a Whistle-blower, one might either sued by law or been discharged by his own group. These altogether are making whistle-blowing and collecting evidence might be presented at the court nearly suicidal acts, even though they are beneficial to whole country, and efficiently halt possible crimes.
This thesis will mainly focus on the whistle-blowing to two kinds of people who have greater power to reveal truth to the public. The legislators, who represent public opinions and make laws, and the press, or Mass Media, which are always gathering news as in battle. The aim of this thesis is to research whether this kind of acts will be sued of criminal prosecution, based on the ratifying of national secrets and related legal conditions. In the researching case of this thesis, a staff from NSPO once tried to expose to his supervisor in the same group but failed. He, then, turns to legislators and press and got sued. The adoption of Grand Justice’s redefinition, which believes investigations over certain organizations are forbidden, which are acquiring Executive Privilege, or are above partisanship and shall, in accordance with law, holding trails independently, or free from any interference. The dissertation will analyze each condition with supportive judicial practices take place in Taiwan. Analyzing the conditions support judicial practices taking place in Taiwan. Besides studying the conflict in NSPO case, in terms of Negates the subject of Illegal, The writer will also cut from the Conflict of obligation and mistake of Object.
However, protecting whistleblowers has the limitation. It only works under the permission of prosecutor and investigation bureau, and it also prohibits illegal proof gathering behavior from any individual. This thesis makes comparative study of jurisprudence with some other countries which are known for more advanced in their democracy and lawful constitution. The targeted sample countries are UK, the United States and New Zealand. The goal is to construct an ideal protecting system that is best suitable for Taiwan’s condition and harmonize the above conflicts, helping Whistle-blowers to prevent the threaten of criminal prosecution, setting the reasonable standard of identifying the quality between real Scandal and Revenging events. In a premise that we cannot expect all the Whistle-blowers know perfectly how to do a just thing justly and obviously there is no such an explicit instruction in Taiwan nowadays. Unavoidably the conflict of obligation will be no surprising, but thinking worthy- to what extend and how, our country should protect these people.
The thesis tends to concluding positively the whistleblowing through Legislators and Mass Media, and does believe that we should have a protecting system to have Whistle-Blower free from fear and guilt. The legitimacy and necessity of Decriminalization should be detailed discussed in the thesis. With the protecting system established, it will surely reinforce the governments’ incorruptibility and efficiency, and perfectly echo with the policy of promoting honest and upright in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

Expose ； Secret ； Scandal ； Whistle-blowing ； Whistle-blowers ； Inform against criminals ； Revenge ； Decriminalization ； Discloses or delivers country confidential information

參考文獻

朱石炎，《刑事訴訟法（上）》，臺北：三民，2001年。

林永謀，《刑事訴訟法釋論》，自版，2006年。

褚劍鴻，《刑事訴訟法論》，臺北：臺灣商務，2001年。

李震山，〈國家機密保護法介評〉，《月旦法學雜誌》，第97期，2003年6月，頁287-295。

李震山，〈論訂定法規命令之決定裁量―行政法院八十八年度判字第四三四三號判決評釋―〉，《臺灣本土法學雜誌》，第15期，2000年10月，頁71-82。