法學期刊
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 特殊傳染性肺炎疫情下有關口罩取締與裁罰管轄權之爭議(The Disputation between the Jurisdiction for the Order Wearing a Face Mask and for the Penalty during the Severe Pneumonia with Novel Pathogens)
編著譯者: 蔡震榮
出版日期: 2021.10
刊登出處: 台灣/月旦醫事法報告第 60 期 /59-70 頁
頁  數: 7 點閱次數: 1070
下載點數: 28 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 蔡震榮
關 鍵 詞: 口罩委任疫情警戒裁處權
中文摘要: 立法院制定嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎防治及紓困振興特別條例(下稱嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎特別條例),以措施法性質,授予疫情中心指揮官幾無限制之權力,加上其交叉適用傳染病防治法,疫情指揮官所為之緊急應變措施,處處踰越法律之授權,實與法律保留原則有違。但疫情一直持續未見終止,嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎特別條例本屬暫時緊急性法律,有無繼續存在之必要,值得探究。地方政府也運用嚴重特殊傳染病肺炎特別條例充分授權,委任警察機關裁處權,警察機關幾乎成為主管機關之執行工具,似有違管轄恆定原則。行政機關缺乏執行力,長久以來一直未改善之問 題,有待提出根本解決之道。
英文關鍵詞: face maskappointmentalarm against pandemicpenalty prescription
英文摘要: According to the Special Act for Prevention, Relief and Revitalization Measures for Severe Pneumonia with Novel Pathogens(following: the Special Act for Severe Pneumonia with Novel Pathogens) which was legislated by Legislative Yuan, the commander of Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC) was authorized with almost unlimited authority by means of the measure law. Additionally, Communicable Disease Control Act was applied crossly. The emergent measures the commander of CECC went beyond the authorization from the laws and might break the nondelegation doctrine. Meanwhile, the pandemic is continued and bares of end, it would be worth to analyze whether the Special Act for Severe Pneunionia with Novel Pathogens which belongs to a temporary legislation for the emergency would be necessary to be valid continually. With the fully authorization from the Special Act for Severe Pneumonia with Novel Pathogens, the local governments appoint the penalty prescription to the police agency, it seems that the police agency became the executive tool for the competent authority and that the doctrine of unchangeable authorization would be broken, it might be a problem with solution for a lang time that the; administrative agency lacks execution and it is looking forward to a complete solution.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、宣布第三級疫情警戒及裁罰規定法源問題
一、引用法規錯誤
二、是否得引用嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎特別條例第7條為依據
參、有關取締口罩於地方機關裁罰管轄委任之爭議
一、有關佩戴口罩之公告
二、臺北市政府公告權限委任管轄權爭議
三、高雄市政府以及其他直轄市並無委任之公告
肆、管轄權爭議之解決
一、法規制定缺失造成管轄權變更之濫用
二、廢除嚴重特殊傳染性肺炎特別條例,回歸傳染病防治法
伍、結語
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
相關論著:
    返回功能列