Former Atomic Energy Council Chairman Hsieh Hsiao-hsing's constitutional interpretation request rejected after sexual harassment ruling

(CNA Taipei, Jun. 30) Former Atomic Energy Council (AEC) Chairman Hsieh Hsiao-hsing, accused of sexual harassment and bullying, had his request for constitutional interpretation rejected by the Constitutional Court. The Executive Yuan's investigation report had previously found him guilty of gender discrimination and sexual harassment.

Hsieh was accused of sexual harassment in October 2022. He requested an investigation by the Executive Yuan, which formed a special task force. The investigation report, released in January 2023, led to his dismissal by the Executive Yuan and referral to the Control Yuan. The Control Yuan impeached Hsieh, and the Disciplinary Court subsequently fined him NT$600,000.

The investigation report concluded that Hsieh engaged in improper differential treatment based on gender in the selection of his secretary or confidential aides, and in his treatment of subordinates regarding work assignments and leave requests. Furthermore, in the selection standards and interviews for secretaries or confidential aides, he inquired about personal matters unrelated to work ability, such as height, age, appearance, zodiac sign, blood type, and marital or childbearing status, constituting gender discrimination under Article 7 of the Gender Equality in Employment Act.

Additionally, Hsieh's behavior towards some female subordinates, including staring intently, excessive proximity or physical contact, and commenting on their physique, makeup, or attire, constituted sexual harassment creating a hostile work environment, as defined by Article 12, Paragraph 1 of the Gender Equality in Employment Act.

Dissatisfied with the investigation report's findings, Hsieh filed a lawsuit seeking to invalidate the report, arguing that the findings of sexual harassment and workplace bullying affected his public law rights. The Taipei High Administrative Court ruled that the investigation report was not an administrative disposition or the legal relationship itself, deeming Hsieh's lawsuit inadmissible and dismissing it. The Supreme Administrative Court rejected his appeal, making the ruling final.

Hsieh argued that the Supreme Administrative Court's decision to deny him the right to administrative litigation violated Article 16 of the Constitution. He subsequently filed a request with the Constitutional Court for a ruling and for judicial review of the legal norms.

The Constitutional Court stated that the petitioner, based solely on his own perspective, contested the factual and legal interpretations of the final ruling. He failed to objectively and concretely demonstrate how his constitutional rights were unlawfully infringed or how the final ruling violated the Constitution. Therefore, the request did not meet the requirements of the Act Governing Constitutional Adjudication, and the court ruled to dismiss it. (Editor: Lin Shu-hui) 1150630

Stand with facts, your every donation is a force to protect press freedom

Download CNA's "First Hand News" APP to get the latest updates in real-time

Text, images, and videos on this website may not be reproduced, publicly broadcast, publicly transmitted, or used without authorization.