國際文官行為標準之研究
黃靖麟
《摘要》
本研究在探討國際文官所擁有的特權及其應有之行為標準。首先，說明國際文官之意涵，其與外交人員之差異。基於兩者代表、功能之不同，而享有不同的特權。基本上，外交人員是國家的代表，代表派出國之國家元首，因此擁有類似於國家元首之司法特權，亦即「外交豁免權」，以確保其職權之行使，並維護外交關係之正常發展。外交豁免權又分為「絕對豁免權」與「功能性豁免權」兩種。外交人員之特權是絕對豁免權，與國際文官之功能性豁免權（行為豁免權）有所不同。國際文官效忠的對象是國際組織，目的在追求最多人民的福祉，與外交人員之代表國家利益有所不同。據此，國際文官擁有的特權是功能性豁免權，僅在執行職務所產生之犯罪行為享有行為豁免權。
再者，國際組織成立之目的在於追求人類最大的幸福，因此國際文官必須放下母國利益，而致力於國際組織之最大利益，以達到「善治」之目標。聯合國為追求此目標，於二○○一年大會通過《國際文官行為標準》，做為國際文官行為標準之依據，主要規範其工作關係、利益迴避、與成員國間之關係、與國際社會及媒體之關係、資料利用與保護、尊重不同習俗與文化、安全與保障、個人行為、就業與活動參與、因職務受外界饋贈或榮譽等規定。
外交人員因《維也納外交關係公約》受到絕對的豁免保障，而國際文官僅及於與其工作相關之範圍，且該行為標準亦明定，當國際文官受到刑事審判時，也同時違反了國際文官之行為標準，而無外交人員所享之司法特權。
[關鍵詞]： 國際文官、國際文官委員會、國際文官行為標準、功能性外交特權、維也納外交關係公約
The Standards of Conduct for the International Civil Service
Empoler Jin-Lin Huang
Abstract
This paper discussed the privileges of international civil service and the standards of behavior required of international civil service. First, this paper explained the definition of international civil service and the difference of diplomats. Because of their differences of representation and function, they have different privileges. Mainly, a diplomat is the representative of his country, represents the head of state, and has the judicial privilege similar to the head of state. The privilege is diplomatic immunity to ensure that he can execute the authority and keep normal diplomatic relations. Diplomatic immunity has two kinds, one is “absolute immunity” and the other is “functional immunity”. The privilege of diplomat is absolute immunity that differs from the functional immunity (acts immunity) of international civil service. International civil service work for international organization, they pursue the goal of welfare of most people in the whole world, and that is different with diplomats that represent the interests of their country. Accordingly, international civil service has the functional immunity, and only when the suspected crime is committed while executing his official duties can the suspect enjoy this privilege.
Furthermore, why the international organizations were established was to seek the happiness of most people in the world. Then, international civil service should lay down the interests of his country, and devoted to the most interests of the international organization for the goal of “good governance”. The congress of UN passed “The Behavior Standard of International Civil Service” in 2001 for this goal to be the norm of behavior standard of international civil service. The standards are the relationship of international civil service, benefit evasion, the relationship with member nations, the relationship with international society and mass media, material use and protection, esteem for different customs and cultures, security and safeguard, personal behavior, to get a job and participate in activities, others offering gifts or honor because of the position.
Finally, it shows the difference between diplomats and international civil service in the cases of Liu and Kahn. A diplomat has absolute immunity because of “Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961”, but international civil service has little reference to work. It shows the value of “Behavior Standard of International Civil Service” in the cases of Kahn is that only when loyally executing the mission of international organization that can be protected with international law. The standard also said that international civil service violated the rule when he had a criminal judgment. Therefore, international civil service only when executing the mission has the protection of international administrative court and doesn’t have other privilege of diplomats.
Keywords: international civil service, international civil service commission, standards of conduct for the international civil service, functional diplomatic immunity, Vienna convention on diplomatic relations