Tang Dezong, a former justice of the Judiciary Yuan, was dissatisfied with the year-end reform, which caused his pension to be cut, which violated the constitutional principle of trust and protection. He filed an administrative lawsuit. The Supreme Administrative Court today ruled that Tang lost the case.

(Photo by reporter Yang Guowen)

[Reporter Yang Guowen/Taipei Report] The pension reform case lost even the judge's lawsuit!

Tang Dezong, a former justice of the Judiciary Yuan, claimed that he received a pension after retiring from the Academia Sinica professor, but after the implementation of the new pension system, he was re-examined and received a substantial reduction. He believed that it violated the constitutional principle of "trust protection". An administrative lawsuit was filed; however, the Supreme Administrative Court found that the original disposition of the Academia Sinica was based on the law, and today it is determined that Tang Dezong lost the lawsuit.

Tang Dezong is a well-known legal scholar in China. He was originally a professor and director of the Institute of Law of the Academia Sinica, and an expert in the fields of constitutional law and administrative law. One-year term, resigned on September 30, 2019.

However, after Tang Dezong resigned as the chief justice, it is said that nearly 1/3 of his pension was reduced due to the annual reform, but he has been hired as a teaching post.

Please read on...

Tang Dezong claimed that he was originally an employee of the Academia Sinica. He retired on October 1, 2011 and became a justice of the Judicial Yuan. Items and other regulations, the approved retirement salary level is 770 salary points, the type of pension is monthly retirement, and the seniority before and after the implementation of the new pension system is 12 years and 16 years respectively, totaling 28 years.

Later, in accordance with Articles 36, 37, and 39 of the Retirement Regulations, the Academia Sinica issued a personnel letter on June 5, 2018 to re-examine the notice, recalculate and review his monthly retirement income, and substantially reduce his previous retirement income. The formally approved monthly retirement income violates the constitutional principle of trust protection.

After his application for review was rejected, he filed an administrative lawsuit.

Tang Dezong pointed out in the court that since he took office as a justice, he has stopped receiving monthly pensions, but the government has implemented the so-called pension reform, and the Academia Sinica re-examined with the original disposition, "not really retrospectively" significantly reducing his previously formally approved monthly pensions. Retirement income violates the intent of the constitutional guarantee of the term of office of the ad hoc justices and the principle of trust protection in the constitution, and is illegal and invalid.

The Academia Sinica replied that according to the Retirement Regulations and other regulations, the recalculation of Tang Dezong's retirement income was correct and legal.

The Taipei High Administrative Court held that the justices of the Judicial Yuan are nominated by the president and appointed with the consent of the Legislative Yuan. The justices are positions guaranteed by the Constitution to maintain their independent exercise of power. Stability, and more importantly, it has a public welfare value for the purpose of ensuring its independent exercise of power in accordance with the law.

Bei Gaoxing pointed out that the case was recalculated and reviewed by the Academia Sinica with the original punishment. It was Tang Dezong who was a retiree of the Academia Sinica before he became a judge of the Judicial Yuan. Before the implementation of the new system) and the public service retirement pension fund management committee (after the implementation of the new pension system), this is the same as Tang Dezong’s retirement from the Academia Sinica, because he served as a justice again, based on the tenure protection of the position of justice. Legal status and reliance interests are two different things.

Bei Gaoxing determined that Tang Dezong's original punishment did not really retroactively apply the retirement regulations implemented on July 1, 2018, and greatly reduced his monthly pension, which violated the constitution's intention to guarantee the tenure of justices and violated the trust of the constitution According to the principle of protection, there is no reason to claim that the original disposition is invalid, so Tang Dezong was sentenced to lose the lawsuit.

Tang Dezong refused to accept it and appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court.

The Supreme Administrative Court held that the judgment of Beigaoxing was correct and there was no violation of the law. The current judgment dismisses the appeal, which means that Tang Dezong has lost the lawsuit.

#