The Impossibility of Legal Constrain on Bureaucratic Discretion: A Case Study of Supreme Court Rulings

碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 公共行政研究所 === 97 === This research intends to answer the question of “how Supreme Court Rulings have impacts on bureaucratic discretion?” As the superior judicial review authority, Supreme Court Rulings are usually thought as an authority which bureaucrats must obey. Is it really the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lin, Yu-Chun, 林俞君
Other Authors: Chen,Don-Yun
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Published: 2009
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/35045064849138471914
id ndltd-TW-097NCCU5055025
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-TW-097NCCU50550252016-05-04T04:17:10Z http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/35045064849138471914 The Impossibility of Legal Constrain on Bureaucratic Discretion: A Case Study of Supreme Court Rulings 自由的行政裁量與受限的法拘束力—大法官會議解釋的個案分析 Lin, Yu-Chun 林俞君 碩士 國立政治大學 公共行政研究所 97 This research intends to answer the question of “how Supreme Court Rulings have impacts on bureaucratic discretion?” As the superior judicial review authority, Supreme Court Rulings are usually thought as an authority which bureaucrats must obey. Is it really the case? In this research, both bureaucrats and Supreme Court are seen as rational actors who have preferences over different outcomes, as the Public Choice theorists usually depict. Author utilizes public choice theory to bridge the gap between the fields of public administration and public law on the issue.. Empirically, this study collects the administrative decrees which were announced unconstitutional by Supreme Court before the end of 2008 in Taiwan. Sixty-six Supreme Court Rulings are found and categorized into four groups by two dimensions: (1) whether the grand judges give the bureaucrats discretion and (2) whether the bureaucrats follow the grand judges’ will to reform the decrees. Both secondary data analysis and in-depth interviews are used in this research to figure out bureaucrats’ preference and the way they respond to the grand judges’ decisions. The statistical result shows that after been announced unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, about 15% of the administrative decrees stay the same. The reasons for this “unresponsiveness” to the Supreme Court Rulings are varied case by case. Basically speaking, bureaucrats take laws as means to fulfill their tasks. They are not motivated to follow the rule of law if there is a requirement to pay an excessive costs to achieve the policy goals. It is interesting to know that judicial review is high on its moral ground but sometimes it is a mechanism without an administrative devises to enforce their rulings. Also, the problems of information asymmetry, multi-principle and multi-agent will also be found in the relationship between Supreme Court and bureaucrats. To sum up, on the one hand, this research has shown that to follow the rule of law is not bureaucrats’ priority. As a result, an administrative mechanism is needed to enforce the Supreme Court Rulings. For example, the Research, Development and Evaluation Commission (RDEC) of Executive Yuan or the Control Yuan can be assigned to do the job. However, on the other hand, the Supreme Court always stands on the side of protecting human rights against government activities, sometimes the rulings might lead to government activities unworkable as we can see from the cases of the Rulings 400 and 440. How to balance the issue of protecting citizen’s rights and governability of the administrative agencies is one of the key problems needed to be solved in order to realize democratic governance in the future. Chen,Don-Yun 陳敦源 2009 學位論文 ; thesis 213 zh-TW
collection NDLTD
language zh-TW
format Others
sources NDLTD
description 碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 公共行政研究所 === 97 === This research intends to answer the question of “how Supreme Court Rulings have impacts on bureaucratic discretion?” As the superior judicial review authority, Supreme Court Rulings are usually thought as an authority which bureaucrats must obey. Is it really the case? In this research, both bureaucrats and Supreme Court are seen as rational actors who have preferences over different outcomes, as the Public Choice theorists usually depict. Author utilizes public choice theory to bridge the gap between the fields of public administration and public law on the issue.. Empirically, this study collects the administrative decrees which were announced unconstitutional by Supreme Court before the end of 2008 in Taiwan. Sixty-six Supreme Court Rulings are found and categorized into four groups by two dimensions: (1) whether the grand judges give the bureaucrats discretion and (2) whether the bureaucrats follow the grand judges’ will to reform the decrees. Both secondary data analysis and in-depth interviews are used in this research to figure out bureaucrats’ preference and the way they respond to the grand judges’ decisions. The statistical result shows that after been announced unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, about 15% of the administrative decrees stay the same. The reasons for this “unresponsiveness” to the Supreme Court Rulings are varied case by case. Basically speaking, bureaucrats take laws as means to fulfill their tasks. They are not motivated to follow the rule of law if there is a requirement to pay an excessive costs to achieve the policy goals. It is interesting to know that judicial review is high on its moral ground but sometimes it is a mechanism without an administrative devises to enforce their rulings. Also, the problems of information asymmetry, multi-principle and multi-agent will also be found in the relationship between Supreme Court and bureaucrats. To sum up, on the one hand, this research has shown that to follow the rule of law is not bureaucrats’ priority. As a result, an administrative mechanism is needed to enforce the Supreme Court Rulings. For example, the Research, Development and Evaluation Commission (RDEC) of Executive Yuan or the Control Yuan can be assigned to do the job. However, on the other hand, the Supreme Court always stands on the side of protecting human rights against government activities, sometimes the rulings might lead to government activities unworkable as we can see from the cases of the Rulings 400 and 440. How to balance the issue of protecting citizen’s rights and governability of the administrative agencies is one of the key problems needed to be solved in order to realize democratic governance in the future.
author2 Chen,Don-Yun
author_facet Chen,Don-Yun
Lin, Yu-Chun
林俞君
author Lin, Yu-Chun
林俞君
spellingShingle Lin, Yu-Chun
林俞君
The Impossibility of Legal Constrain on Bureaucratic Discretion: A Case Study of Supreme Court Rulings
author_sort Lin, Yu-Chun
title The Impossibility of Legal Constrain on Bureaucratic Discretion: A Case Study of Supreme Court Rulings
title_short The Impossibility of Legal Constrain on Bureaucratic Discretion: A Case Study of Supreme Court Rulings
title_full The Impossibility of Legal Constrain on Bureaucratic Discretion: A Case Study of Supreme Court Rulings
title_fullStr The Impossibility of Legal Constrain on Bureaucratic Discretion: A Case Study of Supreme Court Rulings
title_full_unstemmed The Impossibility of Legal Constrain on Bureaucratic Discretion: A Case Study of Supreme Court Rulings
title_sort impossibility of legal constrain on bureaucratic discretion: a case study of supreme court rulings
publishDate 2009
url http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/35045064849138471914
work_keys_str_mv AT linyuchun theimpossibilityoflegalconstrainonbureaucraticdiscretionacasestudyofsupremecourtrulings
AT línyújūn theimpossibilityoflegalconstrainonbureaucraticdiscretionacasestudyofsupremecourtrulings
AT linyuchun zìyóudexíngzhèngcáiliàngyǔshòuxiàndefǎjūshùlìdàfǎguānhuìyìjiěshìdegèànfēnxī
AT línyújūn zìyóudexíngzhèngcáiliàngyǔshòuxiàndefǎjūshùlìdàfǎguānhuìyìjiěshìdegèànfēnxī
AT linyuchun impossibilityoflegalconstrainonbureaucraticdiscretionacasestudyofsupremecourtrulings
AT línyújūn impossibilityoflegalconstrainonbureaucraticdiscretionacasestudyofsupremecourtrulings
_version_ 1718256041225879552