The Challenges and Contemporary Issues of Taiwan’s Investor Protection System: A Model to Learn or to Avoid

臺灣投資人保護制度之挑戰與當代議題：一個值得學習或避免之模式

我國於2002年制訂投資人保護法，並於2003年設立投資人保護中心，除了延續證券暨期貨市場發展基金會所設立之投資人服務中心與保護中心之任務，也擴大保護之業務範圍。相較於其他國家的投資人保護機構，我國投資人保護中心之任務範圍較。相同之處是設置保護基金，以保障投資人於證券商財務困難無償債能力而違約，如投資人已完成交割義務而未取得有價證券或價款時，由保護基金償付。我國投資人保護中心尚可為投資人提起代表訴訟或團體訴訟，同時也提供投資人申訴、諮詢及調處之服務。本文首先比較我國與加拿大、中國、新加坡及美國之投資人保護機構與保護基金之制度，設置根據、基金規模、基金之來源、基金保障之對象與範圍，並檢討現行保護基金是否有調整改進之空間，並做出本文建議。另一部分，則是針對目前投資人保護中心於投保法規範下運作，進行全面檢討，分別對於調處、根據投保法第10條之1所提起的代表訴訟、裁判解任訴訟，以及根據投保法第28條為投資人所提起團體訴訟及和解之實務操作，於運作上所產生之問題，各界對於投資人保護中心具有半官方執法者性質之質疑，以及未來所面臨的挑戰，提出分析與建議。

In January 2003, the Securities and Futures Investors Protection Center (SFIPC), an NPO and NGO, was established according to the Securities Investor and Futures Trader Protection Act (SFIPA), enacted in July 2002. The SFIPC was funded by the securities and futures industries. The creation of the SFIPC and the recent securities law reforms aim at enhancing the corporate governance and the investor protection systems. This article provides a comparison of the investor protection funds in Taiwan, Canada, China, Singapore and the U.S. In addition, special functions of the SFIPC are bringing class actions and derivative suits on behalf of investors and listed companies that suffered damages from securities fraud and other market misconducts. Since its establishment, the SFIPC has filed more than 200 class actions as of December 2015. The SFIPC can also bring derivative suits against corporate directors or to ask the court to remove unsuitable corporate directors. The investor protection institutions in other jurisdictions, such as Securities Investor Protection Corporation in the US and Canadian Investor Protection Fund, do not have these functions. This article introduces special features of the SFIPC. It also identifies and analyzes the contemporary issues regarding the investor protection system. Particularly, the SFIPC has been criticized for its conflict role in serving as an agent of the government, conducting compulsory mediation, bringing class actions and removing directors. Moreover, what are the duties of the SFIPC in bringing litigation and settling the cases and who are supervising its performance to ensure no breach of duties or abuse of its power? Furthermore, future challenges to the SFIPC will be discussed.