| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 法律學系一般生組 === 104 === The crime on disclosing classified information relating to the circumstances other than national defense is the basis of the Article 132 of the Criminal Code. Even though legislators categorize the subject crime by “national defense” and "other than national defense", this distinction is ambiguous. Moreover, not only do judges have varying opinions of what constitutes as “other than national defense” they also lack of a definite, standard criterion to follow in the judicial system, thus making the execution of Article 132 of the Criminal highly controversial Furthermore, it will be a problem of how to suitable applying crime on disclosing classified information (i.e. state classified information, national classified information) when the case fits in both categories. Therefore, this study intends to focus on the crime on disclosing classified information by first explaining the relationship among the various types of classified information, followed by researching the controversies of their application, and then discussing the relevant regulation of the article 132 of the Criminal Code.
Encouraging the government official to expose internal malpractice has become an international norm nowadays. When a government official whistle-blowing, he or she must to provide some government information, which likely pertains to classified documents or information. In this regard, many developed countries such as the United States and New Zealand have legislated the Whistleblower Protection Act, so the whistleblowers have a standard procedure to follow. On the contrary, the Republic of China’s Whistleblower Protection Act is still just a draft. In order to avoid confliction between the government officials of the whistle-blowing and confidentiality obligations under the article 132 of the Criminal Code, this study proposes several solutions and suggestions of legislating of Whistleblower Protection Act under the current laws and regulations.
|
|---|
