政府採購停權制度之研究

我國政府採購法之停權制度明定拒絕不良廠商參加投標及作為決標或分包，其立法理由係為杜絕廠商違法及違約行為，避免不良廠商再次危害其他機關，建立良性競爭環境，惟政府採購法之停權制度於實務執行上有許多質疑及爭議。因此，該制度設計是否符合公平、正義原則及具備維護市場交易秩序之功能，實有探討之必要。我國政府採購法停權制度屬行政罰之性質，亦應適用行政罰法之競合理論規範，惟若廠商之行為同時構成多款停權事由，如何正確判斷違反事項與執行停權程序確實是一大難題。目前實務上相關採購停權爭訟於法院審理時，法官之裁判幾乎都是針對廠商及機關間所提出構成停權事由之要件該當與否，並無審視可能之構成各款停權事由競合之問題及處理方式。主管機關行政院公共工程委員會雖有注意實務上可能發生各款競合適用之問題，然僅於105年頒布之「刊登不良廠商執行注意事項」中規範第1款（或第2款）與第6款之適用及處理原則，並未通盤釋明各種競合態樣之處理方式，在立法者及法院實務判決未給予統一之處理見解情況下，導致機關間對於各採購案發生各款停權處分競合時，有不同作法，包括：擇重處罰者、將所構成之各款要件一次性辦理停權、擇先發生或最後發生之款次，甚或先將一款停權事由執行完畢後，再執行另外一款次之停權事由等不同之處理方式。當廠商的行為構成多款停權事由遭機關之停權處分時，機關依各自思維判斷及裁處方式，造成法的不安定性問題。本文首先闡明政府採購法及停權制度之性質及規範目的，及說明何謂行政罰下之競合理論，接續針對構成停權事由競合時應如何適用該競合理論之規範，及可能構成競合之款項作分析與檢討，並輔以整理機關遇此競合情形時各自為政之實務判決案例，最後對於停權制度所衍生之競合問題進行分析評論及建議，提供主管機關、採購機關與司法實務做參考，讓我國採購法之停權制度能更臻完善。關鍵字：政府採購法、停權制度、停權事由、一事不二罰、競合理論

關鍵字

政府採購法；停權制度；停權事由；一事不二罰；競合理論

並列摘要

The suspension system under the Government Procurement Law of Taiwan explicitly rejects the participation of unscrupulous vendors in bidding and subcontracting. The legislative reason is to eliminate illegal and non-compliant behavior of vendors, to prevent unscrupulous vendors from endangering other authorities again, and to establish a healthy competition environment. However, there are many questions and controversies regarding the implementation of the suspension system under the government procurement law. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate whether the design of the system conforms to the principles of fairness and justice and has the function of maintaining the order of market transactions. The suspension system of our government procurement law is an administrative penalty and should be governed by the competitive theory of administrative penalty law. However, if the actions of a manufacturer constitute multiple grounds for suspension, it is indeed a major problem to determine the correct violation and to implement the suspension procedure. In practice, the judges' decisions are almost always focused on the validity or otherwise of the elements that constitute the grounds for suspension proposed by the manufacturer and the agency, without examining the possible competition of the various grounds for suspension and how to handle them. Although the Public Works Commission of the Executive Yuan has paid attention to the practical problems that may occur in the application of the various paragraphs of the competition, it has only regulated the application and handling principles of paragraphs 1 (or 2) and 6 in the "Notes on the Publication of Non-Performing Manufacturers" issued in 105, and has not explained the handling of various types of competition in a comprehensive manner．In the absence of a uniform understanding of the legislator's and the court's practical decisions, there are different ways of handling the competing suspensions in each procuremencase, including: choosing the heavier penalty, suspending all the elements of each paragraph at once, choosing the paragraph that occurs first or last, or even executing the suspension of one paragraph first and then executing the suspension of the other paragraph. When a manufacturer's behavior constitutes multiple suspensions, the authorities may make their own judgments and decisions, resulting in legal uncertainty. This article first explains the nature and purpose of the government procurement law and the suspension system, and explains what is meant by the competitive theory of administrative penalties, then analyzes and reviews how the competitive theory should be applied when the suspension causes competition, and what may constitute competition. The final analysis and recommendations on the competition issues arising from the suspension system will provide reference for the competent authorities, procurement authorities and judicial practice, so that the suspension system of the procurement law in Taiwan can be perfected. Keywords：Government procurement law, Suspension system, Cause of suspension, Non-dual punishment, Competition theory