| dc.contributor | 政大國發所 | en_US |
| dc.creator (作者) | 高永光 | zh_TW |
| dc.date (日期) | 2011-03 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 8-Oct-2013 14:40:13 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 8-Oct-2013 14:40:13 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 8-Oct-2013 14:40:13 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/61275 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | The scrutiny system in Taiwanwith Ombudsmen on national exams of public servants hadbeen carriedout for more than eighty years since its first launch in 1930. In 2004,criticismappearedto question the necessity of its existence, which was believed to be caused by the absence of the fourth tenure Ombudsmen who were in the Control Yuan, which is in charge of it. Although after September 2008, the scrutiny system has been rehabilitated, the legitimacy of scrutiny system remains in question. In this article, the author tries to deal with theabove issue bymainly discussing the essence of the five-power division government brought by the national founder--Dr. Sun Yat-Sun. Based on the division of labour in governance and the omnipotent government argued by Dr. Sun, there is a cooperative relationship between Ombudsmen and the Examination Yuan with regard to the scrutiny system; therefore the scrutiny system has its legitimacy essentially.Without the scrutiny system, the national exams of public servants will not be easily recognized by the public in Taiwan. One possible solution is to switch the scrutiny system from the Control Yuan, which has29 Ombudsmen to other institutes. However, careful scrutiny are needed while making sucha change,including in consideringthe legitimacy inthe mechanism of the current scrutiny system. | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 我國監試法規定，考試院舉行考試，除檢覈外，應請監察院派員監試。但因五權政府之中央府際關係不明確，有關監試制度之存在，須進行探討與分析。而第三屆監察委員於94 年1 月31 日任期屆滿後，第四屆監察院長及24位監察委員，才在97 年7 月4 日經立法院通過同意權審查，而於97 年8 月1 日就職。前後三年半時間，並無監委執行監試工作，以致有部份意見認為監察院之參與考試權行使之監試制度似可廢除。本文以為，監試制度行之有年，法制之建立已屬不易，而監試制度其制度上之功能，至少有四項：儀式性功能、程序性功能、防弊性功能、監督性功能。如果監試制度之改善，或以其它方式取代，上述之功能應須事先有周全的考量。不過，憲定職權在法定程序性職權行使機關無法配合時，究竟應如何處理？機關內部職權行使，外部監督機關無法依法配合時，法律上應如何因應解套？可再深入討論。 | en_US |
| dc.format.extent | 754856 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 國家菁英季刊, 7(1), 1-14 | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 監試制度;國家考試;憲定職權 | en_US |
| dc.title (題名) | 論監試制度存在之正當性 | zh_TW |
| dc.title.alternative (其他題名) | An Analysis of the Legitimacy in Taiwan`s Scrutiny System for National Exams | en_US |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | en |
