從司法權完整性探討司法院職務法庭組織建構

Analyzing the Court of the Judiciary's Structure of from the Viewpoint of Completeness of the Judicial Power

法官法明定司法院設職務法庭，掌理法官懲戒及法官不服司法行政處分之司法救濟審。職務法庭法官產生，由司法院院長提請法官遴選委員會遴任。因職務法庭正掌理與司法院有關之各種審判事項，司法院復為其職務監督人。此與德國以法官自治原理建構職務法庭者，大異其趣。司法權包括司法行政權及司法審判權，司法院院長就司法權行使成敗須負最終責任，如無職務法庭法官人選之最終決定權與職務監督權，則是否符合責任政治法理？

The Judges Act requires the Judicial Yuan to establish the Court of the Judiciary, which takes charge of judges disciplinary cases and remedy procedures. Under the request of the President of Judicial Yuan, the appointments of judges of the Court of the Judiciary will be made by Judicial Selection Committee. However, while the Court is in charge of all the adjudication matters, the Judicial Yuan acts as its supervisory body at the meantime. This completely differs from the German structure, which founded the Court under the principle of judge autonomy. More, the judicial power encompasses both judicial administrative and adjudicative power, and the President shall bear the final responsibility. If the President fails to appoint and supervise the judges, it may also violate the essence of responsible politics.