Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Other Titles:||Study on the Supervision of Independent Administrative Agencies|
Independent Administrative Agency;Majority Rule;The Doctrine of Political Accountability;J.Y. Interpretation No. 613;The nondelegation doctrine;ex ante control;ex post control;Participative legitimacy;Professional legitimacy;Democratic legitimacy
|Issue Date:||2016-06-17 11:36:51 (UTC+8)|
|Abstract:||獨立與監督是一組不易相容並存的概念，因為獨立就是不受他人支配或控制的意思。然而，作為國家公權力組織的一部分，獨立行政機關不可能完全不受監督。問題只在於如何在監督之餘，尚能保持其獨立性？ 本文第一部分以美國與歐洲英法等國之獨立行政機關的發展歷程為基礎，指出行政一體與責任政治原則將政治部門視為是唯一的監督者。然而這種建立在選舉與多數原則的課責機制並不適用於獨立行政機關，因為其本質上就是一種「非多數機構」。除了政治部門外，法院、被管制的業者、消費者，甚至是一般公民，都可以成為監督者。 在監督的方法上，本文第一部分以行為的效力範圍為指標，將獨立行政機關的可能行為類型分成三類。對於不具法效力的行為，本為認為應以專業為重心。反之，具普遍效力的命令或政策決定，就應該加重民主正當性的要求。最後，對於具體個案的決定，則應同時兼顧專業與民主正當性。\r 作為監督者之一的行政權（總統或內閣）在遂行監督時，本文以為其不能直接推翻獨立行政機關的個案決定；但卻可以介入獨立行政機關的政策決定與命令權。|
Independence and supervision are two concepts almost exclusive to each other, for independence simply means not being controlled or supervised. However, as a part of the public authority, an independent administrative agency could never exist without supervision. The question is how can preserve its independence while being under supervision. With the basis of the development process of the independent administrative agencies in countries such as the United States of America, or England and France in Europe, the first part of this article points out that the principles of administrative unity and the politics of accountability take the political department as the only supervisor. However, this kind of accounting mechanism established on the foundation of election and majority principles is not suitable for an independent administrative agency, since in nature it is an “organization of non-majority.” Not only political departments, judicial courts, vendors under regulation, or consumers, even ordinary citizens can be a supervisor. On the method of supervision, this article first divides the types of the possible behaviors of the independent administrative agencies into three groups, with the effectiveness of its behavior as the indicator. For those behaviors with no judicial effect, the professional should be the focus. On the contrary, for the commands with general effect or policy decisions, the requirement of the democratic legitimacy should be stressed. Finally, for decisions on individual cases, professional and democratic legitimacy should be taken care of in a balanced way. This article also points out, as one of the supervisors, when the executive power exercises the supervision on an independent administrative agency, the decisions on individual cases should not be cancelled directly, but the policy decisions and the power of command can be intervened.
Chengchi law review
|Appears in Collections:||[法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文|
Files in This Item:
All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.