關說的定義在這裡 「公務員廉政倫理規範」第二點第（五）款規定定義為：「指 其內容涉及本機關（構）或所屬機關（構）業務具體事項之決定、執行或不執行，且 因該事項之決定、執行或不執行致有違法或不當而影響特定權利義務之虞。」 至於你提的案例 我實在看不懂你的重點在哪裡? 是說布希政府任意解任檢察官? 還是說國會議員施壓? 這跟本案有啥關係? ※ 引述《guare (瓜籽)》之銘言： : 何謂關說？或者說如何處理？ : ※ 引述《hifree (hifree)》之銘言： : : 其實這個案子剛好可以檢視一下何謂妨礙司法公正的關說 : : 在國外立法例下 : : 妨礙司法公正的正式定義為「具有妨礙司法公正傾向及意圖的作為、一連串的作為 : : 或行為」（an act, a series of acts, or conduct which has the tendency and : : is intended to pervert the course of justice）具體表現在任何一種下列的行為： : : 中止刑事檢控以換取報酬 : : 提出虛假的指控 : : 向調查人員提供虛假的陳述 : : 刻意協助他人逃避追捕 : : 恐嚇、脅迫或騷擾證人 : : 證人故意不出席聆訊，以換取報酬 : : 捏造、藏匿或毀滅證據 : : 發布文章，刻意妨礙司法公正 : : 不當地中止檢控 : : 使原來可能得以提出檢控的法定程序受挫 : Hifree 不愧是懂美國的人，一個實際案例剛好替 hifree 作註腳： : 來源： : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Domenici#Department_of_Justice_controversy : (原文有點長，我重點解說） : Prior to the 2006 midterm election Domenici called and pressured : then-United States Attorney for the District of New Mexico David : Iglesias to speed up indictments in a federal corruption : investigation that involved at least one former Democratic state : senator. When Iglesias said an indictment would not be handed down : until at least December, Domenici said "I'm very sorry to hear : that" — and the line went dead. Domenici's telephone manners were : the subject of a later article in The Albuquerque Journal, which : quoted numerous other sources whom Domenici had treated rudely by : hanging up after making a point or receiving an unsatisfactory : answer. : 簡單地說，參議員杜曼尼的競爭對手因為貪污被檢察官調查，杜議員就打電 : 話給檢察官，希望他趕快處理，最好趕在11月選舉前。檢察官不鳥他，回覆 : 說最快得12月才能偵結 : Iglesias was fired a little over one month later by the : Bush Administration. A communication by a senator or House member : with a federal prosecutor regarding an ongoing criminal : investigation is a violation of ethics rules. : 重點是，一個月以後該名檢察官就被布希政府開除了！ : In a March 2007 : statement, Domenici admitted making such a call.[20] House : Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., issued : subpoenas to require Iglesias and three other ousted U.S. : attorneys to testify before Congress.[21] : Domenici later admitted calling Iglesias, though Domenici claimed : he never used the word "November" when he called Iglesias about an : ongoing Albuquerque courthouse corruption case.[22] Domenici has : denied trying to influence Iglesias, and has hired lawyer K. Lee : Blalack II to represent him.[23] : According to the Justice Department, Domenici called the : Department and demanded Iglesias be replaced on four : occasions.[24] : According to The Washington Post, on the day of the firing : (December 7, 2006) William Kelley, a deputy to then White House : Counsel Harriet Miers, said in an email that Domenici's chief of : staff was "happy as a clam" about the Iglesias firing. A week : later, a Justice Department email to the White House counsel : stated: "Domenici is going to send over names tomorrow (not even : waiting for Iglesias's body to cool)." : 這裡的重點是：有關係就沒關係，沒關係就有關係。你檢察官哪有我參議員 : 大？一通電話就把你開除了！ : On April 24, 2008, Domenici was admonished by the Senate Ethics : Committee for "inappropriately" contacting in 2006 one of the nine : U.S. attorneys later fired by President Bush.[16] : 所謂的國會自律，僅值一紙不痛不癢的警告。 : The light punishment came after the committee found “no : substantial evidence” that Domenici tried to influence attorney : David Iglesias when he contacted him to inquire about the status : of a 2006 investigation into corruption charges on a state : Democratic official. A possible indictment could have buoyed the : re-election hopes of Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.), who was seeking : to replace Domenici when the senator retires after his current : term. Iglesias charged that Domenici and Wilson were pressuring : him to wrap up the investigation before that November’s : elections, a violation of ethics rules.[20] : The Ethics Committee said that Domenici’s phone call to Iglesias, : in advance of an upcoming election, “created an appearance of : impropriety that reflected unfavorably on the Senate”.[20] In : July 2010, Department of Justice prosecutors closed the two-year : investigation without filing charges after determining that the : firing was inappropriately political, but not criminal, saying : "Evidence did not demonstrate that any prosecutable criminal : offense was committed with regard to the removal of David : Iglesias. The investigative team also determined that the evidence : did not warrant expanding the scope of the investigation beyond : the removal of Iglesias."[26] Domenici said of the closed : investigation, "The Justice Department has now confirmed what I : have always said and believed: I never attempted to interfere with : any government investigation. I am glad that this matter has : concluded."[26] : 後面細節就不多翻了。 : 總之，這羣人 (foreign or domestic) 對關說司法個案的態度就是如此。從制度面到現實 : 面，一路走來始終如一。 : 我的心得是，這羣人一旦掌握了權力，大家真的只好個人顧性命。 --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 111.240.215.124 那我也很想請您開示一下 本案檢察官不上訴哪裡違法或不當了 如何符合「公務員廉政倫理規範」第二點第（五）款：「指 其內容涉及本機關（構）或所屬機關（構）業務具體事項之決定、執行或不執行，且 因該事項之決定、執行或不執行致有違法或不當而影響特定權利義務之虞。」 而構成違法關說 麻煩正面回答一下好嗎? 1.背信罪無法上訴第三審 2.有無違反商業會計法部分是最高法院發回理由,高等法院應受其拘束 3.更一審判決已認定沒有登載不實,違反商業會計法部分不成罪 4.第三審無法自行認定事實 請問你上訴發回的可能性在哪裡? 還請明示 至少沒有符合「公務員廉政倫理規範」第二點第（五）款所定義的關說 ※ 編輯: hifree 來自: 111.240.215.124 (09/23 18:41) 樓上要不要看看這篇的反駁 http://ppt.cc/3FRs 不過重點還不在那 重點是 第 376 條 左列各罪之案件，經第二審判決者，不得上訴於第三審法院。 一、最重本刑為三年以下有期徒刑、拘役或專科罰金之罪。 二、刑法第三百二十條、第三百二十一條之竊盜罪。 三、刑法第三百三十五條、第三百三十六條第二項之侵占罪。 四、刑法第三百三十九條、第三百四十一條之詐欺罪。 五、刑法第三百四十二條之背信罪。 六、刑法第三百四十六條之恐嚇罪。 七、刑法第三百四十九條第二項之贓物罪。 背信罪本來就不能是訴第三審了 吵背不背信有啥意義? 有人好像沒有搞清楚重點喔 第 376 條 左列各罪之案件，經第二審判決者，不得上訴於第三審法院。 一、最重本刑為三年以下有期徒刑、拘役或專科罰金之罪。 二、刑法第三百二十條、第三百二十一條之竊盜罪。 三、刑法第三百三十五條、第三百三十六條第二項之侵占罪。 四、刑法第三百三十九條、第三百四十一條之詐欺罪。 五、刑法第三百四十二條之背信罪 六、刑法第三百四十六條之恐嚇罪。 七、刑法第三百四十九條第二項之贓物罪。 背信罪根本不可能上訴第三審 何來符合「有...之虞」的說法? 聽我的幹嘛? 法條說的那麼清楚 背信罪不得上訴第三審 你還疑問嗎? http://tw.myblog.yahoo.com/chengs0112/article?mid=989&sc=1 . 背信罪依刑事訴訟法第376條第5款規定，屬不得上訴於第三審法院之罪名。檢察官以單一案件具有”上訴不可以分”為由，將背信罪與違反商業會計法一併上訴至最高法院，最高法院亦同此見解而將案件撤銷發回。簡單的說，檢察官認為曹興誠以違反商業會計法的方法，掏空聯電公司(背信罪)，兩罪之間具有方法與結果的關係，在法律上稱為牽連犯，為單一案件，依刑法第55條規定，只論處較重刑的罪名，兩者具有不可分的關係。所以在上訴來說，因為兩罪具有不可分的關係，所以背信罪的部分也可以跟著違反商業會計法的部分一併上訴。 ※ 編輯: hifree 來自: 111.240.215.124 (09/23 19:11)