律師轉任法官誘因之研究

THE STUDY OF INDUCEMENTS FOR LAWYERS TRANSFERING TO JUDGES

陳瑞齡(Jui-Ling Chen)

指導教授 ： 顧慕晴

國立臺北大學/公共事務學院/公共行政暨政策學系/碩士(2010年)

摘要

鑑於目前經由司法官考試錄取者多為大學抑或研究所應屆畢業生，社會各界普遍認其年輕、閱歷不足，有資淺化問題；且人民囿於刻板化印象，遂對其所為之審判產生較多之質疑，進而對於司法之信任感降低，司法院為改善此一現象，並呼應民國88年全國司法改革會議之「法官由律師、檢察官進用」呼聲，爰自1987年推動律師轉任法官制度。惟自推動至今，申請轉任者寥寥無，幾成效不彰。基此，本研究乃以誘因為研究核心，透過文獻分析法、深度訪談法及參與觀察法等研究方法的運用，試圖分析個人層面及制度層面之正、負誘因，進而探討此二層面其間之合致及落差，並依據此約略歸納出拒絕轉任、猶疑觀望及積極轉任地帶，最後提出制度層面誘因調整之建議。
本研究發現在個人層面之正誘因約計五項，多源自於個人個性；負誘因約計七項，則多源自於法官公務員化所致；而現行制度誘因明顯不足，僅能吸引律師界之「二軍」；對於審查機制是否開放則仁智互見。另在制度層面之正誘因約計六項，亦多源自於公務員之身分，且尚無法完全滿足轉任者之需求；而某些法規規範之正誘因未能落實，致誘因更顯不足；至於司法院主事者認為轉任者多為二等律師，且轉任後表現不如預期，致採排拒態度。另在兩層面之合致及落差部分，除正誘因僅有二項合致外，負誘因存在有相當之ㄧ致性，落差亦有五項之多。
最後，本研究提出四大項政策建議：
一、制度及個人誘因均為正向者的強化：如爭取相關預算，加強法官福利、行銷法官職位的穩定性等
二、制度及個人層面均為負向誘因者的改變：如建立親合的審查制度、研修律師轉任法官作業準則、推動法官法等
三、制度及個人誘因有落差者之調整：如提高法官待遇、切實執行法規相關規定、改善法官審判環境等
四、達成律師轉任法官制度政策目的之其他建議：如推動專家參審制度、進行律師人格測驗、強化律師職前訓練、限制司法特考應考資格、全面停止司法特考等

關鍵字

法官 ； 律師 ； 誘因

並列摘要

In view of the fact that most of the Judges and Prosecutors Examination Admissions’ Candidates are comprised of current undergraduates or postgraduates, it is commonly believed they are too young and inexperienced to give convincing judgments. Under this circumstance, the general public has more doubts about the trial decisions and does not trust the Justice system quite. In order to improve this problem and to respond to the proposal of “Judges are recruited from lawyers and prosecutors” in the National Justice Reform Conference in 1999, Judicial Yuan established the Regulations of Lawyers transferring to Judges since 1987. However, there were only few lawyers applying to transfer since that time. Inducement was the core concept in this study, and it was divided into 4 groupings. They were individual positive inducements, individual negative inducements, system positive inducements and system negative inducements. This study adapted methods of literature analysis, in-depth interviews and participation observation to analyze these 4 inducements, to investigate similarities and differences among them, to approximately group into 3 zones of hating to transfer, hesitating to transfer and positive to transfer, and finally to propose some policy suggestions to adjust the inducements in the system level.
The study found, in the individual level, there are 5 positive inducements attracting lawyers to transfer to judges, mostly based on personal characteristics, 7 negative inducements mostly due to Judges abiding to Civil Servant Trend. The current inducement in the regulation level is apparently insufficient and attracts only the second best lawyers. And different people have different views as to whether the examination rule is open or not. There are about 6 positive inducements in the regulation level, mostly based on the identity of the civil servant and have not fully satisfied the needs of the transfer candidates. While certain positive inducements of the regulations have not come into effect, the overall inducement is apparently insufficient. As the persons in charge in Judicial Yuan believes most lawyers who filed for the transfer are second best lawyers and perform worse than expected, they usually hold rejected attitudes. For the similarities and differences between two levels, the positive inducements have two similarities; the negative inducements show substantial uniformity and five differences.
Finally, the study proposes four major policy suggestions below:
1.Strengthening the positive inducements in the individual and regulation levels: such as to acquire relevant budget, improve Judge’s benefits, promote the stability of Judge’s position.
2.Modifying the negative inducements in the individual and regulation levels: such as to set up friendly examination rules, regulations regarding to interns transferring to Judge and advancement of lawyer rules.
3.Adjusting difference between inducements in the individual and regulation levels: such as to increase Judge’s salary, precisely implement rules and regulations and improve Judge’s trial environment.
4.Other suggestions to achieve the policy of lawyers transferring to Judge: such as to advance expert participation rule, implement lawyer character test, strengthen lawyer orientation training, set prerequisites for judicial special examination and terminating judicial special examination.

並列關鍵字

Judge ； Lawyer ； Inducement

參考文獻

吳瓊恩，2001，《行政學》。台北：三民出版社。

臺北律師公會，2009.07.10，〈律師法〉，網址：http://www.tba.O-

財團法人民間司法改革基金會，2009.07.09，〈誰來當法官？〉，網

財團法人民間司法改革基金會，2009.07.09，〈律師轉任法官之我見〉

陳玉珠，2003，〈我國法官任免制度之研究〉，東海大學公共事務學