政院不覆議
會計法修正案漏「教」字爭議的大烏龍，行政院昨天找主計總處、法務部以及行政院法規會研商，決定擴大解釋，認定職員包含教授在內，不過法界質疑，萬一法官跟檢察官認定不同，會產生更大的爭議。
對於法案，要把教授使用不符合的收據和發票，來核銷經費的除罪化，行政院長江宜樺，今天上廣播接受專訪，對會計法修法爭議，漏了「教」字，主動提出解套方案。
[[聲源:行政院長 江宜樺]]
“如果說他(教授)只是因為，發票報帳的方便，以及他原來的制度缺乏彈性，以至於誤蹈法網，這種是比較情有可原，用主計單位的函釋或解釋，如果說能夠平息，這方面的紛爭的話，其實用比較符合經濟成本，不要付出立法代價的方式”
不過在他決定出手的前一天，就找來主計總處、法務部跟行政院法規會，一起討論之後，認定大專院校的職員，包含教授在內，用擴大解釋的方法，來化解爭議。不過，法界人士認為，會引起更大爭議。
[[司改會執行長 林峰正]]
“明顯違背了法律的，所謂的文意解釋，請問一下職員跟教授，這是兩件事情，檢察官跟法官，可是不受你這個，行政解釋的拘束”
由於目前行政院不提覆議，國民黨立委蔡正元，在臉書上表示，將主動提案修法化解難題。
Government trying to bail Legislature out for its Accounting Act disaster (2013/06/06)
The Legislature passed an amendment last Friday that exempted public research grants for university professors from being audited. At least it was supposed to, but lawmakers inexplicably left out the word “professors” from the bill. The government is now trying to bail out the Legislature from its mistake, interpreting the revision as covering professors, but some legal experts doubt the move will settle the issue.
The amendment was meant to absolve professors who used falsified receipts to claim research grants. Premier Jiang Yi-huah was asked in a radio interview this morning about the omission of “professors” from the bill, and he offered a simple solution.
Jiang Yi-huah
Premier
If professors unwittingly violate the law simply because of submitting invoices for reimbursement in a convenient way or working under an inflexible system, this is relatively excusable. If an interpretation from government accounting agencies can settle the controversy, then we should use this more economic method and not make the Legislature pay the price.
On Wednesday, Jiang met with Taiwan’s main accounting agency, the Justice Ministry and the Cabinet’s regulations commission to discuss the issue. They offered a broad interpretation of the revision, which currently only exempts “university staff” from audits, saying that “staff” includes professors. But a legal expert said the move would only worsen the controversy.
Lin Feng-jeng
Judicial Reform Foundation
The so-called interpretation clearly was counter to the law. “Staffers” and “professors” are two different things. Prosecutors and judges will not be beholden to your Cabinet interpretation.
Because the Cabinet has not proposed revising the amendment, KMT lawmaker Tsai Cheng-yuan said on Facebook that he will offer a new revision to quell any doubts.
留言列表
