透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.81.221.121
  • 學位論文

行政契約法制在我國地方自治團體間跨域自治事務合作運用之研究

A Study on the Administrative Contract Legal System Utilization in the Cross-Boundaries Cooperation among Local Self-Government Organizations in Taiwan

指導教授 : 江嘉琪
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


面對全球化與在地化的外在環境變遷,國內在民國88年修憲精省及地方制度法制定後,地方政府權能增加卻也同時面對區域競爭與跨區域問題之挑戰,故透過區域化地方政府共同合作,以因應解決問題已是實務趨勢。但我國學界和實務界普遍認為我國目前跨域自治事務合作法制不明,地方制度法第21條、第24條兩個法條規範,不夠明確,建議修法,行政院也已向立法院提出地方制度法修正案。 在修法通過之前,學界普遍認為在不涉及組織相關規定前題下,行政契約較有靈活運用的空間而且認為地方政府間的行政契約並不需增設新的機構,亦不增加額外的預算,應可應用於地方治理的跨域問題上。民國90年我國行政院籌辦的「全國行改革新會議」上,有關「中央與地方關係」的議題討論中,最後亦作出「跨區域事務協調的契約化(公法上的協定)」之具體建議。 但行政程序法對平等關係的行政契約規範極少,跨域自治事務合作使用行政契約的法制其實並不明確,造成地方政府間不知如何運用,尤其內政部於民國90年4月20日舉辦「地方自治團體跨區域事務行政契約訂定研討會」時,其中有學者指出如何兼顧行政程序法所規制的管轄權恆定原則是一大問題。故本文企圖透過比較法分析歸納德國、英國、美國及日本共25種跨域合作的協議內容,將雙方負擔的給付義務內容個別觀察,以歸納各負擔類型,分析除了管轄權移轉外其他類型使用情形,並研析在我國法制下使用的可行性。同時探討在跨域合作運用是否真的法制不足?是否果然「較有靈活運用的空間」?直接以行政契約理論及地方制度法之本質規範,去研究跨區域自治事項合作訂定行政契約的法律問題,並從我國實務選擇三個案例作分析,以印證研究結果,這三個案例分別是經過雙方議會通過的台北市與基隆市的「北基垃圾合作案」、由上級主管機關強力介入主導締結的花蓮縣與宜蘭縣「花宜垃圾轉送處理案」及台北市與台北縣行政首長共同簽署的「捷運環狀線合作案」行政契約。期待努力達到以下目的: 1、釐清跨區域自治事項合作各種協議的法律性質、內涵。 2、釐清跨區域自治事項合作訂定行政契約的行政程序。 3、釐清跨區域自治事項合作訂定行政契約的瑕疵效果。 4、釐清跨區域自治事項合作訂定行政契約的救濟。 5、試擬跨區域自治事項合作訂定行政契約的標準化作業流程。 6、提出跨區域自治事項合作訂定行政契約應記載及不應記載事項。

並列摘要


Facing the change of globalized and localized external environment, Taiwan amended the constitution and downsizing the provincial government and enacted Local Government Act in 1999 in which the local governments would have more power and capability, but they still have to face the challenges from regional competition and cross-boundaries problems. So it is a trend of practices to solve problems through the cooperation between regional local governments. However, the academic circle and practitioners agree that the existing legal system in the cooperation of cross-boundaries self-government affairs is not clear, so does the regulations stipulated by Article 21 and 24 of Local Government Act. They have recommended modifications. Executive Yuan also has submitted an amendment proposal to Legislative Yuan. Before the passing of the amendments, the academic in general argued that under the pre-condition of not involving with the related regulations about organization, administrative contract had space of more flexible exercise and it was neither necessary to establish new agencies and nor necessary to increase budget for administrative contracts between local governments, so the administrative contracts could be allowed to apply in the cross-boundaries of local governance. In 2001, at “National Administrative Reform Conference” organized by Executive Yuan, in the discussions of the subject “the relations between central government and local government”, a concrete recommendation was presented: contractized the coordination of cross-boundaries affairs (the agreement in public law). But Administrative Procedure Act includes fewer regulations on Administrative Contract that is in equal relationship and the legal system of application of Administrative Contract to the cooperation of cross- boundaries self-government affairs virtually not clear that local governments even not know how to take advantage of it. Particularly, when the Ministry of Interior held “Seminar on Drawing up Cross-Boundaries Affairs among Local Self-Government Organizations” on April 20, 2001, some scholars pointed out that it was a big problem to give a consideration to the permanent principle of jurisdiction regulated by Administrative Procedure Act. The article, therefore, intends to analyze and induct through comparative method the contents of agreements of 25 cross- boundaries cooperation cases in Germany, Britain, USA and Japan by giving individual observations of the contents of given obligations shouldered by each side. It inducted the types of burdens, analyzed the use of various types of burdens except for the transfer of jurisdiction and conducted the research and analyses of their feasibility under the existing legal system in Taiwan. Meanwhile, we explored if the arguments that the legal system was not able to meet the requirements of the exercise of cross-boundaries cooperation and that “there was space for flexible applications” were true. With the nature of administrative contract theory and Local System Act as a direct norm, we conducted research on the legal problem in drawing up administrative contracts under the cooperation of cross- boundaries self-government items and picked out three cases in the practices in Taiwan to verify the results of the research. The three cases are: “Taipei City-Keelung City Cooperation on the Handling of Garbage”, which was ratified by city councils of both cities; “Hualien County-Ilan County Cooperation on the Transfer and Handling of Garbage”, which was forcefully intervened and dominated by superior authorities; and “Taipei City-Taipei County Cooperation on the MRT Ring Lines” signed by the executive heads of Taipei City ad Taipei County. The research expects to achieve following purposes: 1. Clarify the legal nature, connotation of various agreements on the cooperation in cross-boundaries self-government items; 2. Clarify the administrative procedure in drawing up administrative contract for the cooperation in cross-boundaries self-government items; 3. Clarify the defect effects in drawing up administrative contract for the cooperation in cross-boundaries self-government items; 4. Clarify the administrative remedy in drawing up administrative contract for the cooperation in cross-boundaries self-government items; 5. Try to draw up the standard operation procedure (SOP) in drawing up administrative contract for the cooperation in cross-boundaries self-government items; 6. Present the items that should be on record and the items that should not be on the record in drawing up administrative contract for the cooperation in cross-boundaries self- government items.

參考文獻


60、公民投票在地方治理之應用與限制,中國地方自治第56卷第12期社論,頁2-3,2003年12月。
61、對地方制度法修正之商榷,中國地方自治第59卷第2期社論,頁1-2,2006年2月。
59、實施公民投票對地方發展的衝擊,中國地方自治第56卷第11期社論,頁1-4,2003年11月。
17,吳志光,行政法,二版,學林出版有限公司,2007年6月。
7、李惠宗,行政程序法要義,五南圖書出版,2002年11月。

延伸閱讀