論吹哨者保護制度之建構

1970年代起，吹哨者保護制度開始受到各國關注與重視，蓋面對層出不窮之社會案件或政府弊案，若有人願意挺身而出、趁早揭發內幕，即有可能避免危險發生或降低損害，然我國目前針對吹哨者保護之規範散見於不同法規，缺乏完整且全面之制度，導致多數人欠缺意願而不欲冒險吹哨。為促進我國建立「友善吹哨環境」，本文以文獻回顧方式，試圖釐清吹哨行為之基本內涵，接著介紹歐洲統合機構於近年所發表之資料，同時參酌歐洲人權法院案例，以理解其處理此議題之模型與各種考量因素。其次，以比較法研究依序分析美國、英國與日本已建立之吹哨者保護制度，包括保護主體、保護事項、保護措施等。最後回歸我國法制，檢視現行法規與實務判決之操作方式後，借鏡他國制度以提出本文建議，希冀藉此建構我國將來可能之立法方向。

關鍵字

吹哨者；吹哨行為；歐洲理事會；歐洲聯盟；歐洲人權公約第10條；表意自由；美國吹哨者保護法；英國公益揭發法；日本公益通報者保護法

並列摘要

Since the 1970s, the countries of the world began to pay attention to the whistleblower protection system. Facing endless social cases, scams and scandals, if someone is willing to step forward and blew the lid off them as soon as possible, it would be likely to avoid danger or reduce damage. However, because current regulations of whistleblower protection under Taiwan law are dispersed in different field, and there has been lack of complete and comprehensive system, most people don’t want whistleblowing which would put themselves in danger. In order to promote the establishment of “a friendly whistleblowing environment” in our country, this article attempts to clarify the basic connotation of whistleblowing by reviewing the literature. Secondly, this article will introduce material published by several European institutions in recent years. Meanwhile, taking the related cases of European Court of Human Rights to figure out their way to deal with whistleblowing and various considerations. Then, this article will take comparative research methods to analyze the whistleblower protection system, about covered subjects, protected activities, protection measures, etc., established in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan. Finally, after reviewing current regulations of whistleblower protection and the operation methods of judgement in Taiwan, this article will make some suggestions about construction of whistleblower protection system by referring to other contries’ legislation.

並列關鍵字

whitsleblower ； whistleblowing ； Council of Europe ； European Union ； European Convention on Human Rights Article 10 ； freedom of expression ； Whistleblower Protection Act ； Public Interest Disclosure Act