我國地方警察經費編列制度之政經分析

Abstract

警察制度的發展，常伴隨政治、經濟、社會及文化的演化而變遷。我國地方警察經費編列制度特性，在歷經威權時期、威權轉型時期與民主鞏固時期等三個不同政經環境階段，分別呈現出恩寵式的經費編列制度、黑金派系影響下的經費編列制度，與傾向地方自治的經費編列制度。 依警察法第十六條規定：「地方警察機關預算標準，由中央按各該地區情形分別規劃之。前項警察機關經費，如確屬不足時，得陳請中央補助」。另警察法施行細則第十三條規定：「本法第十六條地方警察機關預算標準，由內政部報請行政院核定施行…」，但從警察法公布實施以來，中央迄今仍未定出各地方警察機關之預算標準。另依「財政收支劃分法」第三十七條規定：「各級政府支出劃分如下：一、由中央立法並執行者，歸中央。二、由直轄市立法並執行者，歸直轄市。三、由縣（市）立法並執行者，歸縣（市）…。前項第一款及第三款如需交由下級政府執行者，其經費負擔，除法律另有規定外，屬委辦事項者，由委辦機關負擔；屬自治事項，由該自治團體自行負擔…」，但長期以來，因中央與地方警察權限劃分未臻明確(憲法、警察法與地制法，對於警察制度、省警政與縣警衛之範疇區別均未明訂)，以致地方警察經費編列權責歸屬爭議不曾間斷。 目前我國警察機關預算之編列，係依警察機關組織隸屬區分，中央警察機關預算由中央政府編列，地方警察機關預算由地方政府編列。惟在地方自治運作體系下，卻衍生出黑金與地方派系箝制警察執法之問題，備受各界重視亟待妥善解決。 我國憲法在1947年公布施行，其制定之背景，係以全中國大陸土地遼闊人口分布廣泛為適用對象，惟以我國目前管轄範圍、居住人口、及各縣市風俗民情，地方警察事務並無「因地制宜」之必要，憲法中央與地方警察分權之結構設計，似乎不適用於臺灣實存之政經環境。且臺灣民主發展至此，在媒體監督與政黨相互制衡下，既使警政回歸中央集權制度，走回威權或警察國家體制之機會亦微乎其微。因此，為了警力統一指揮調度有效打擊犯罪，避免地方派系、黑金箝制警察執法，本文建議將地方警察經費改由中央統籌編列，在面對全球化之挑戰下，警察組織將更能發揮其功能，維護社會治安、打擊各類犯罪。

Police systems evolve with political, economic, social, and cultural developments. As our society has chronologically gone through the autocracy phase, the transit phase, and the democracy phase, the local police budget preparation system has correspondingly been influenced by the political leaders’ favor, the political fractions related to black gold politics and municipalism. According to the Police Law, article 16, “the standards of the local police budgets are regulated by the central government in accordance to the local police situations. If the allocated budget is insufficient, the local police can ask for central government subsidies.” In addition, the Police Law, Enforcement Rule 13 states that “the standards of the local police budget preparation regulated in the Police Law, Article 16, should be reported by the Ministry of the Interior to the Executive Yuan and then be approved and implemented.” However, since the Police Law was issued and enforced, the central government has not made the concrete regulations of the local police budget preparation system. Moreover, the Fiscal Revenue and Expenditure Law, Article 37, regulates that “The expenditures of the central and local governments are implemented in the following ways: A. Those that are issued and enforced by the central government belong to the central government. B. Those that are issued and implemented by the municipalities belong to the municipalities. C. Those that are issued and implemented by the county (municipal) governments belong to the county (municipal) government…When the expenditures in the first subparagraph and third subparagraph of the previous paragraph should be enforced by the subordinate government, unless there are some other regulations, the money should be offered by the agent organization if it is commissioned, but the money should be offered by the autonomy if it is a autonomous affair…” Nevertheless, since there haven’t been any clear rules of rights between national police and local police in any related laws and regulations, the controversies and debates over the rights of and responsibilities for the local police budget preparation have never ceased. Currently, the police budgets are prepared by the governments the police organizations belong to: the national police budgets are prepared by the central government, and the local police budgets are prepared by the local governments. Regrettably, as the local governments are encouraged to manage their own affairs by the laws, black gold politics and the negative influence of the political fractions have seriously hindered the police from doing their jobs, which has been a great concern of the public and an urgent problem to be solved. The Constitution of the Republic of China was issued in 1947, at a time when the territory was much larger and the population was much bigger and was distributed much wider. However, at present, with a much smaller territory and population, and hugely different local cultures, it seems that the allocation of local police affairs don’t need vary from place to place. The separation of the rights of the central government police and those of the local police in the Constitution doesn’t fit in our current political and economic circumstances in Taiwan. Furthermore, as democracy has blossomed here in Taiwan with strict supervision from the mass media and the checks and balances of the two parties, it is barely possible for our country to turn into an autocracy or a police state even if centralization is imposed in the police system. Therefore, with a view to effectively dispatching police force to fight against crimes, and to preventing local fractions and black gold politics from crippling police law enforcement, this thesis argues that the budgets of the local police should be prepared by the central government, so that the police force can perform more efficiently and effectively to preserve social order and fight against crimes in the face of the challenges of globalization.