- 期刊
違反《環境教育法》罰鍰額度裁量基準的修法評析：以行政規則內外部法律效力為例
Commentary on the Amendment of the Judgment Base of Penalties in Violation of the "Environmental Education Law": Taking the Internal and External Legal Effects of Administrative Rules as an Example
摘要
《環境教育法》為規範培育國民瞭解與環境之倫理關係，增進國民保護環境之價值觀，促使國民重視環境，透過公民自主性的行動，為達永續發展之公民教育所制定。其中關於違反法律規範精神行為的處置，則委以《環境教育法環境講習時數及罰鍰額度裁量基準》以行政規則之法位階作為完善《環境教育法》的手段。行政規則為行政機關行政行為與程序之準據，所規範事項除「機關內部秩序與運作」外，另包括行政機關訂頒之解釋性規定及裁量基準。依據環境教育法第19條，所有員工、教師、學生均應參加四小時以上環境教育，違反環境教育法者則處以罰鍰，並有裁量基準。本研究建議行政規則管制方式之選擇，除合乎比例原則要求外，因實質上涉及人民權益，故不能簡單以此拒絕人民對其爭訟，而應從「實質認定」屬「法規命令」，而非以僅屬「行政規則」就排拒爭訟。
並列摘要
The "Environmental Education Law" is formulated to standardize and cultivate citizens' understanding of the ethical relationship with the environment, enhance citizens' values of environmental protection, and encourage them to value the environment. It is formulated through citizens' independent actions to achieve sustainable development. Regarding the disposal of behaviors that violate the spirit of legal norms, the "Environmental Lecture Hours and Penalty Amount Judgment Criterion" is entrusted with the legal rank of administrative rules as a means to improve the "Environmental Education Law". The underlying concept of this paper is the administrative rules which are the basis for the administrative actions and procedures of administrative agencies. Administrative rules include not only "internal order and operation of agencies", but also the explanatory regulations and discretionary standards promulgated by administrative agencies, which are discussed here as the internal and external effects of the administrative rules, respectively. This paper examines Article 19 of the Environmental Education Law, which stipulates all employees, teachers and students should participate in environmental education for more than four hours a year. And henceforth, violators of the Environmental Education Act can be fined with a progressive fine scale for every consecutive offense. It is argued that the current Law does not ensure a choice of administrative control methods for a range of offenses, from minor to severe. Also, the rules do not meet the requirements of the principle of proportionality. This paper suggests that administrative rules must be designed as a "statute order"; as they actually involve the rights and interests of the people, they can not deprive constitutional rights to litigate against the decisions based on administrative rules.
參考文獻
延伸閱讀
- 蔡震榮（2013）。行政罰法修法之探討。法令月刊，64(2)，23-43。https://doi.org/10.6509/TLM.201302_64(2).0003
- 柯素萍（2017）。不利處分定性爭議之研究-以「其他種類行政罰」為中心〔碩士論文，國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201703019
- 吳秦雯（2020）。全民健康保險法制中裁罰性不利處分性質之探究：以現行行政法院判決為中心。軍法專刊，66(5)，67-91。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=P20180227001-202010-202011110011-202011110011-67-91
- 張淑雅（2010）。The Influence of the Program of Environmental Issues on Elementary School Pupils’ Environmental Knowledge, Attitude and Behavior〔碩士論文，亞洲大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0118-1511201215463941
- 傅玲靜（2022）。Research on Mediation of Environmental Disputes in Administrative Law。東吳法律學報，33(3)，83-154。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=02593750-202201-202207140008-202207140008-83-154