| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺灣大學 === 國家發展研究所 === 101 === For the purposes of responding to trends in the political environment, facilitating healthy competition between political parties, ensuring administrative neutrality among civil servants, and enhancing the existing civil service system, the Civil Service Administrative Neutrality Act was announced and implemented in Taiwan on June 10, 2009. However, the regulatory aspects and the practical aspects of the law have yet to become fully developed, and there is a need for performance reviews and improvements. This study adopted a public policy analysis approach, and applies qualitative research in the form of multiple case studies, to explore the issues in the Neutrality Act. The study was conducted with semi-structured interviews with 23 individuals from the target groups of the Neutrality Act, the enforcement personnel, the competent authorities, experts and scholars, and the legislative authorities. The current development in the enforcement of the Neutrality Act was discussed in depth in the interviews, and the process of drafting the Neutrality Act, its contents, the result analysis, and factors that might hinder its effectiveness were reviewed, followed by recommendations with the aim to protect the rights of civil servants and develop a positive political culture.
The main findings of this study include the following: (1) Regulatory aspects: (i) With respect to the Administrative Neutrality Act, the drafting process did not take sufficient details into account, and the rules were not sufficiently clear or appropriate, both of which would have an impact of the effectiveness of the implementation; and (ii) with respect to other personnel legislation, the Political Appointee Act has not been passed, which prevents the effective implementation of the Neutrality Act; the Neutrality Act and the Civil Servant Service Act are similar in nature. (2) Practical and systematic aspects: (i) There was a lack of awareness of the Neutrality Act among the department heads and political appointees; (ii) there was a lack of clarity and consistency in the execution of communication; (iii) the authority of the investigation and supervisory systems required further clarification; (iv) there was a gap between implementation at the central government level and at the local government level; (v) the guaranteed
relief system remained inadequate; (vi) the rules for personnel promotion and demotion remain insufficiently developed; (vii) a lack of awareness and practical experience regarding administrative neutrality; and (viii) interference from political parties and political representatives was strong and the political culture remained to be improved.
The policy recommendations include the following: (1) Regulatory aspects: (i) a full review of the Neutrality Act; (ii) further development of the other personnel related legislations, lobby for the Political Appointee Act, and more severe punishments for violations of administrative neutrality with an assessment of the feasibility of adding them to the Civil Service Act. (2) Practical and systematic aspects: (i) To strengthen the understanding of the Neutrality Act among department heads and political appointees; (ii) to establish examples of standard and timely campaigns; (iii) to set up independent investigation committees and performance inquiries; (iv) to establish separate levels of regulation for the central and local governments; (v) to further develop the guaranteed relief systems; (vi) to enhance the personnel promotion and demotion systems; (vii) to reinforce the practical training regarding the Neutrality Act and the awareness of civil service ethics; and (viii) to improve the political environment and develop a healthier political culture.
|
|---|
