我國教師申訴救濟途徑之研究－以臺灣省教師申訴評議委員會運作為中心

Abstract

教師申訴制度實施近20年以來，已成為30多萬教師權益受損時之最主要、最常用之行政救濟途徑，其重要性不容忽視。教師申訴制度之性質，係行政程序，亦是行政救濟程序與行政機關內部自省機制，且評議程序益趨獨立與嚴謹，漸有「準司法」程序之性質。\n 教師申訴途徑、訴願途徑及勞資爭議處理途徑，皆為行政機關內部之救濟途徑，使教師之行政救濟途徑呈現多元化之景象，各途徑之目的皆為維護權益免受侵害，然提起要件、主體、客體、組織、審理、決定效力各有不同，雖有部分重疊，也有各自獨特之處，但目前實務運作上尚無困難。\n 本文主要探討臺灣省教師申訴評議委員會審理再申訴案件之運作，由於教師申訴評議委員會組織及評議準則規範之不足，因此審議案件時，常須援引行政程序法、訴願法及其他訴訟法之規定或法理來補充，臺灣省申評會多年來已建構判斷餘地審查架構，且對於舉證責任分配、正當行政程序之審查，亦有頗為豐富之評議書見解可供各申訴機關參考。\n 教師申訴制度有其存在之必要性，惟目前仍面臨若干問題尚待解決：（一）教師申訴定位未明確，救濟程序疊床架屋；（二）程序性規範過於簡陋，須援引其他規定補充，易生爭議；（三）評議決定拘束力不足，對於未依評議決定意旨另為處分（措施）者，並無有效處理規定，對申訴人之權益保障未足；（四）外界對教師申訴制度存有疑慮，有師師相護之質疑，亦有行政干預之質疑。\n 本文建議，教師申訴制度未來改革的方向：可重新建構教師申訴制度之架構，將行政處分案件簡化為一級一審制，管理措施之案件仍採二級二審制併行，申訴途徑並能取代訴願途徑，避免因重疊而產生之問題。而對教師法教師申訴章及評議準則之修正建議：可研議制定教師申訴專法之可行性或重要事項於教師法明定，如增修「請求一定作為」之申訴類型、申評會組織成員增加具法律專長人士之比例、教師組織代表應明訂為同級教師會（或同級教師工會）、簡化行政處分案件為一級一審制、處理情形回報及懲處機制、準用訴願法等規定。而其他程序性規定之增訂與修訂，如增修：不受理、停止執行、共同申訴及合併審議、調查證據方法、閱覽卷宗程序、停止評議、評議決定未達三分之二僵局解決方式、評議機關「自為決定」、不服決定之救濟、評議書公開等規定。

Teacher appeal system has been practiced for nearly twenty years. It has become the main and most adopted relief approach, the importance cannot be overlooked. The nature of this system is an administrative procedure as well as an administrative remedy and a self-examination mechanism within the administrative organizations. Furthermore, the appraisal procedure is getting more independent and strict, which is gradually gaining the character of‘quasi- judicial ’. \n\nTeacher appeal approach, administrative appeal approach, and settlement of labor-management disputes approach are all administrative remedies of internal administrative organizations. They display the diversified phenomenon of teacher administrative remedies approaches. The purpose of each is to safeguard teachers’rights from violation. However, the essential element of complaints, subject, object, organization, judgment, and the effect of decision－each one is different. Though there are some overlap parts, each approach owns its uniqueness. At present, there is no difficulty in practical operation. \n\nThis essay mainly discusses the operation of Taiwan Provincial Teacher Grievances Committee when appraising re-appeals cases. Due to the insufficiency of review standards, when appraise cases, often have to quote Administrative Procedures Act, Administrative Appeal Act and other code of procedure or legal principles of lawsuit as supplements. Besides, the structure of margin of appreciation has been built for years, which offers abundant views from appraisal files as references for teacher appeal organization in respect of offering allocation of evidence responsibility and examination of proper administrative procedures. \n\nTeacher appeal system has its existing necessity. However, there are some issues need to be solved. Firstly, the orientation of teacher appeal is unclear, therefore, some administrative remedy procedures overlap each other; secondly, procedures standard is too simple and poor, it has to cite other regulations as supplements and hence, arguments can easily happen; thirdly, the power of appraisal decision constraint is insufficient, when expected action is not done according to the appraisal decision but otherwise, there is no effective regulation to safeguard the petitioner’s rights; lastly, outsiders have doubts about teacher appeal system：either suspicions of facts covered among teachers or administrative intervention.\n\nThis essay suggests some innovational directions for teacher appeal system. For instance, the structure of this system can be rebuilt to simplify administrative action cases to one level- one trial system; management measure cases remain two level- two trial system; teacher appeal approach replace administrative appeal approach to avoid unnecessary procedure overlap problem. Suggestions of amending teacher appeal chapter in Teachers’Act and review standards：We may study and discuss the possibility of legalizing a specialized Teacher Appeal Act or set clear rules about important issues. For instance, adding a appeal category of“appeal of certain action”; increasing legal specialists percentage in Teacher Grievances Committee members; regulating teacher organization representatives to same- level as teacher association (or teacher union); simplifying administrative action cases to one level-one trial system; handling situation feedbacks and punishment mechanism; apply mutatis mutandis for Administrative Appeal Act. We may also add and amend other procedure regulations, for example, regulation of”dismiss” (to reject a complaint) , enforcement stop, common complaints and merging appraisals, methods of investigating evidence, procedures of file viewing , appraisal stop, solution of breaking a deadlock in decision which is not agreed by at least two-third committee members, appraisal organization”decide by itself”, remedy of disagreement decisions, review reports disclosure to public.