- 學位論文
社交餽贈或違法賄賂？論賄賂罪與公務員廉政倫理規範中「對價關係」之疑義
Gift giving or bribery? The problem of establishing "mutual relationships" in the Criminal Code of Bribery and in Ethics and Misconduct Regulations of Public Servants
摘要
本文以96-102年間，涉犯貪污治罪條例第5條第1項第3款收受賄賂罪責之高等法院判決書共30件為基礎，從中發現無罪判決以對價關係不明為主要理由，惟影響對價關係中無罪原因係賄賂或不正利益與職務行為間的交付關係，包含主觀意識與客觀環境界定行賄行為，雖以社交餽贈為名，顯係變相賄賂，但多數無罪判決卻因無法證明一定對價關係，認定收受餽贈行為僅違悖官箴，違反公務倫理，惟倘能證明存有一定對價關係，將「一般社交禮俗」清楚界定，得以審酌社交餽贈與賄賂之區辨。 爰此，從香港餽贈規定與我國公務員廉政倫理規範制度中比較，及經訪談政策利害關係人發現，我國公務員廉政倫理規範法位階及明確性不足，致僅為訓示性規定，無法有遏阻效果，因此本文提出三點建議：建構行政倫理法制明確規範公務員行政倫理、賄賂罪構成要件修法明確化以提昇定罪率、提昇政風人員專業素養及相關法治教育訓練，將透過法規範明確制定及機關內部強化宣導，強化構成要件認定以提高賄賂罪定罪率。
並列摘要
This study is based on the totaled 30 ruled cases of committing bribery crime held in the high court. The said cases involve violation of Paragraph 3 of Item 1 of Article 5 of the Corruption Offenses Ordinance during 2007-2013. Acquittal due to unclear consideration occurs when considerations for the delivery of the bribe or improper benefits and duties–including gifts given in the name of networking but actually are bribes of another nature and bribery defined by subjective awareness and an objective environment–cannot be defined. Identified instances of the acceptance of bribes contradict Rules for Officials (Guanzhen) and are a breach of the ethics of public service. General social etiquette should be clearly defined so as to differentiate between gifts of a networking nature and bribery. After a comparison of Hong Kong’s provision on gifts and our nation’s code of ethics for civil servants along with interviews of those involved in the policy, this report found that our nation’s code of ethics for civil servants is not clear. It only acts as a guideline and does not help in prevention. As such, three suggestions are made in this report to promote and strengthen the identification of the elements of bribery so as to increase conviction rate: (1) set up administrative ethics to clearly regulate the code of ethics for civil servants; (2) clarify the amendment of the law relating to the elements of bribery; (3) enhance the professionalism and relevant legal training of ethics officials.