法官倫理規範法制之研究

Research on Legal System of Judicial Ethics Regulations

陳麗芬(Li-Fen Chen)

指導教授 ： 陳新民

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/國家發展研究所/碩士(2012年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2012.02522

摘要

司法制度能否運作順暢，與法官、檢察官、律師等司法制度參與者的素質優劣有密切關連，日本在二次戰後將以上三者合稱為「法曹三者」。對法律倫理之要求，源於法律專業者悖反其公共服務之不義行為。從職務之特質觀察，法官倫理特別重著於法官之獨立性與公正性。
影響法官獨立審判之負面因素甚多，其中「貪腐」是過去幾年被廣泛使用的概念。本文認為司法貪腐的意義及型態，不能僅以犯罪的觀點進行審視，只要是為自己或他人圖謀任何形式的私人非法利益，而對司法體系造成負面影響，並悖離司法公正的一切濫權或不當行為，均應屬於司法貪腐。由《聯合國反腐敗公約》之規定可知，制定關於審判機關人員之行為規則，不但是解決司法貪腐的可行手段，更是現代國際社會要求各國應該履行的國際義務。
根據國際透明組織公布的「2010/2011全球貪腐趨勢指數」顯示，有42% 的臺灣民眾認為司法機關是所有參與評比的部門中，貪腐情況最為嚴重者。本文另由1992年至2011年6月法官受議決成立懲戒之案例中，整理歸納出法官違紀之類型，發現以辦案疏失、怠惰、未謹慎切實者最多，不當社交及理財之情形次之，其中也不乏因破壞法官公正廉潔形象嚴重，而受休職或撤職並停止任用之處分者。準此，制定具有可執行性的審判機關人員行為規則並加以落實，確為我國當前應努力之目標。
目前各國在法官倫理領域的發展，呈現出兩種不同的趨勢：一是透過制裁強制要求遵守；另一則是由法官基於內在確信而自願奉行。我國法官法授權司法院徵詢全國法官代表意見後制定法官倫理規範，要求法官應確實遵守，違反倫理規範情節重大者，得對其進行評鑑；有懲戒必要者，並得為懲戒之事由。可知我國是採取上述第一種模式。基於以往經驗，訂定法官倫理規範並賦予強制效力，確有必要。但如何在法官行為規範與法官基本權利之間求取平衡，亦為值得嚴肅看待的重要議題。
美國是法官倫理規範制定最早及最完備之國家，在亞洲，日本、香港也被認為是司法清廉度極高的國家和地區。本文爰以美國、日本、香港之法官倫理規範及違紀案例為比較研究對象，分別從法官倫理之基本原則、執行司法職務行為及職務外活動等方面，對我國法官倫理規範進行檢視，以期發現並補充不明確或不足之處，並作為日後解釋疑義之依據及相關部門修法之參考。

關鍵字

法官倫理 ； 法官行為規範 ； 司法獨立 ； 司法貪腐 ； 班加羅爾司法行為原則 ； 司法行為模範法典 ； 法官行為指引

並列摘要

The question of whether a judicial system will work smoothly depends greatly on the quality of its participants: the judges, prosecutors, and the attorneys. For this reason, post-WWII Japan referred to the above three participants as the “three arms of justice”. The demand for legal ethics originated from mala fide acts committed by legal professionals that violated the nature of their public service. Due to the special nature of a judge’s role, the professional ethics of a judge place particular emphasis on the requirements of independence and fairness.
Many factors detrimentally affect the independent decision-making of a judge; amongst them, “corruption” is a concept that has been widely applied in recent years. The author of this thesis considers that the definition and forms of judicial corruption cannot be determined purely from the perspective of whether a crime has been committed. The concept of “judicial corruption” should include any abuse of power or improper act that seeks to derive a personal, illegal gain in any form for the judge him/herself or any other person, that departs from the ideas of judicial fairness and results in a detrimental effect on the judicial system. The provisions of the “United Nations Convention Against Corruption” (UNCAC) demonstrate that the formulation of codes of conduct governing personnel of judicial authorities is not only a feasible means of solving judicial corruption, but is also an international obligation placed upon all member countries by the contemporary international community.
According to the “2010/2011 Global Corruption Barometer” released by Transparency International, 42% of the Taiwanese public believe that corruption is most serious amongst the judicial authorities, in comparison to the other departments being evaluated. By examining the cases of affirmed disciplinary action against judges from the period of 1992 to June 2011, the author of this thesis has found that the types of violations committed by judges are mostly negligence, laziness, and lack of proper care in investigations, followed by inappropriate social relationships and financial management. There were also a number of judges who were suspended or permanently dismissed, due to their having severely damaged the fair and honest image of a judge. Therefore, it is indeed necessary for Taiwan to work towards formulating an enforceable code of conduct governing judicial authority personnel, and to implement such code.
Presently there are two different international trends in the development of a judges’ code of ethics: one is the mandatory demand for compliance through sanctions; the other is voluntary compliance by judges based on their internally held beliefs. Under Taiwan’s Judges Act, the Judicial Yuan was authorized to issue the Code of Conduct for Judges, after seeking the opinion of the national judges’ representatives, and judges are mandatorily required to comply with this Code. A serious violation of the Code will result in an evaluation; disciplinary action will be imposed under several circumstances if necessary. This shows that Taiwan has followed the first trend. Based on past experience, it is indeed necessary to formulate a judicial conduct code and to equip it with mandatory effect. However, there is also another serious and important issue of how to strike a balance between a code of conduct for judges, and the fundamental rights of judges.
The United States was the first country to impose a code of judicial conduct, which is also the most comprehensive. In Asia, Japan and Hong Kong have also been considered to demonstrate relatively high degrees of judicial honesty. This thesis seeks to examine the Code of Conduct for Judges of Taiwan by studying and comparing the codes of judicial conduct of the United States, Japan and Hong Kong, as well as their records of violations, from the perspectives of the fundamental principles of such codes, the carrying out of judicial powers and duties, and activities outside the scope of duties. It is hoped that such a study will uncover and supplement any uncertainties or inadequacies in Taiwan’s existing Code of Conduct for Judges, so that it may serve as a basis for future interpretation of uncertainties, and as a reference for legal amendment by the relevant authorities.

並列關鍵字

legal ethics ； judicial ethics ； code of judicial conduct ； judicial independence ； judicial corruption ； Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct ； Model Code of Judicial Conduct ； Guide to Judicial Conduct

參考文獻

劉鍾錡，《我國法官政治中立之研究》，國立臺灣大學社會科學院國家發展研究所碩士論文，2011年3月。

王泰升，《臺灣日治時期的法律改革》，臺北：聯經出版事業股份有限公司，2010年。

李禮仲，〈美國法律專業人員之倫理規範〉，《律師雜誌》第313期，臺北：臺北律師公會，2005年10月。

吳坤芳，〈美國律師公會法官行為模範法典〉，《律師雜誌》第335期，臺北：臺北律師公會，2007年8月。

森際康友編，《法曹倫理》，劉志鵬等譯，臺北：財團法人民間司法改革基金會，2011年。