查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 應考試權之價值與保障=Value and Protection of the Right to Sit for Examination |
---|---|
作 者 | 蕭文生; 謝文明; | 書刊名 | 國家菁英 |
卷 期 | 4:1 2008.03[民97.03] |
頁 次 | 頁43-56 |
專 輯 | 人權價值與國家考試 |
分類號 | 573.44 |
關鍵詞 | 應考試權; 服公職權; 程序基本權; 機會平等原則; Right to sit for examination; Right to hold public office; Fundamental procedural right; Principle of equal chance; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 針對公務人員任用資格與專門職業及技術人員執業資格,我國憲法基本決定係採取國家考試方法選任之,國家考試的舉辦也是屬於公權力行使的一環,相對於此種公權力的行使,人民也應該要有相對應的基本權利來加以對抗,蓋只有在人民明白於國家考試中,具有何種相對應的基本權利後,才會起身反抗國家不合理的公權力措施,才能對於遭受侵害的權利,向法院主張保護其所應有的權利。對此,我國憲法第18條規定,人民有應考試服公職之權。本條為人民於參加國家考試的程序中,提供一個權利保障的基礎。其中,應考試權是我國憲法基本人權中與其他各國不同而獨特的地方,因此應考試權作為我國的基本人權,其在國家考試中具有何種價值?又如何在國家考試中提供保障,即為本文思考的開端。首先,對於我國是否有應考試權之存在,本文從我國憲法的體系解釋與歷史經驗,以及基本權細緻化的發展來觀察,發現應考試權在我國憲法上具有獨立存在的價值。其次,應考試權乃人民於國家考試中所涉及主要的基本權利,且其性質係屬於程序性的基本權利,據此,人民除存有請求公平考試程序的權利外,考試機關對於整個考試程序的設計,亦應朝向程序透明化、程序參與、程序平等、程序結果正確與程序經濟的要求來進行,最終實為考試權核心價值保障之機會平等原則。最後,應考試權的保障範圍,則須配合考試及格的時點加以界定,由於國家考試區分為,針對公務人員任用資格的國家考試與針對專門職業及技術人員執業資格的國家考試,因此,在此二種國家考試中,應考試權的保障範圍也會有所差別。透過探討應考試權的價值與保障範圍,使人民的權益在國家考試中可以更加落實,也可促使整體國家考試制度更加健全與公平。 |
英文摘要 | Article 18 of the Constitution provides a basic platform in protection of this basic right: ”the people shall have a right to participating in public examinations and to serving as public posts.” This right to participating in public exam among other basic rights asserted in our constitution is a unique design and rarely finds its equivalent in the world. Therefore a question at first sight is: what exactly the significance of the right to public exam as a constitutional basic right has? In other words, how does it function in public exams? It became the departing question of this article. To start with, based on the observations of systematical interpretation of Constitution, constitutional history experience, and the developments in the elaboration of basic rights, this article found an independent right to participating in public exam constitutionally necessary. Secondly, as a procedural basic right as it is, people are entitled to claim on fair examinational procedures. Also the government, when designing public exam procedures, is obliged to response to the urge from the transparency in procedure, the participation of procedure, the equality in procedure, the consequential correctness of the procedure, and procedural economy. Finally, the scope of right to participating in public exam should be determined by the time point of passing; and the content of right protection should differentiate with different exams given that there are two categories of public exams: the one for official clerk, and the other for specialist or technicians. By deepening the discussion of its functions and scopes, people’s right to participating in public exam will obtain more progress in the extent of concretion and realization; meanwhile, the whole examinational system of public exam will be sounder and fairer. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。