透過您的圖書館登入
IP:34.227.112.145
  • 學位論文

敲開對話之門—志工陪伴者在修復式司法中之角色

Knocking on the Door for Dialogue – The Role of Volunteer Accompanists in Restorative Justice

指導教授 : 黃蘭媖
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


修復式司法自1970年代末期興起,其去除傳統刑事司法以懲罰與應報為核心的架構,而著重被害人的損害復原、加害人的責任承擔,並強調當事人參與、自主解決問題的意願與能力。我國法務部與各地檢署於2009年開始推行修復式司法方案,並採用各國廣泛使用的加/被害者調解(VOM)為主要進行模式。部分地檢署招募有興趣的司法志工參與修復式司法,擔任「陪伴者」,負責最先和當事人接觸與聯繫,並在修復過程中給予支持。 陪伴者的參與有助於增加「社區」角色在修復式司法中的意涵,其志工的身分也能帶來許多優勢。陪伴者既是修復式司法推行之初帶領當事人的引門人,他對修復式司法的理解,以及在操作過程的行為模式,皆影響整體修復程序的進行,角色至為關鍵。本研究訪談九名實務工作者,同時透過文件分析、參與觀察等方式,瞭解我國修復方案設置陪伴者的目的,並探討陪伴者對修復式司法的詮釋、對自身角色的認知以及其實務上之行為模式,以建構出陪伴者在修復式司法中的角色定位。 研究結果發現,陪伴者的設計主要是因應方案要求促進者的專業性質所可能產生的困境,藉由志工資源的納入可以輔助促進者推動修復程序,並提升司法保護。另一方面,不同背景的陪伴者對修復式司法的詮釋與實務操作方式皆有所差異,有些陪伴者的認知與作法甚至和修復式司法理念不盡相符。而當前陪伴者與促進者的分工方式使得陪伴者的實務角色更為擴張,重要性幾乎已凌駕促進者,但其角色身分之轉換與修復程序認知卻不足以支撐其擴張的角色,而造成方案深度與成效未達預期。 研究建議未來陪伴者的角色設計可以朝兩種面向進行修正:一為提升陪伴者的角色,轉型為協同促進者或志工促進者,加強其與專業促進者的互動、合作密度以及認知共識;另一種方式則為削減其修復式司法工作者的代表性,而以司法志工之身分專責陪伴當事人,回歸「陪伴」的本質而提供當事人更周全的支持與保護。

並列摘要


The rise of restorative justice in the late 1970s substituted punishment and retribution of traditional criminal justice. Restorative justice focuses on the harm recovery of the victim, the responsibility of the offender, and the participation and empowerment of participated parties. In Taiwan, Ministry of Justice and District Prosecutors Offices began to implement restorative justice program in 2009, and launched widely used Victim-Offender Mediation (VOM) as the practical model. Some Prosecutors Offices recruited judicial volunteers who were interested in restorative justice as "accompanists" in the program. Their job was to contact and build relationships with the parties involved. During the restorative process, the accompanists were supposed to provide support to the parties involved. The involvement of accompanists, being community volunteers, installed the"community" element in restorative justice, which might be advantages. In practice, accompanists played important role in the preparation and actual meetings. They were the persons who led parties to the entrance of the restorative program. Therefore, their understandings of restorative ideas and practices based on their training had impacts on the restorative process and results. Through document analysis, participant observation and interviewing with nine practitioners, this study attempted to explore the purpose of the establishment of accompanists, their comprehension and behavior in practice, and their role in Taiwanese style restorative justice program. I found that the design of accompanists was intended to supplement professional facilitators and share some of the preparation and follow-ups. By the input of volunteer resources, it was hoped that the accompanists could assist in both the mediation and recovery process after meetings. Secondly, accompanists differed in terms of their interpretation and practical operation of restorative justice due to individual background and experience. Some were less consistent with restorative principle that others. Thirdly, current cooperation mode and labor division between accompanists and facilitators expanded the practical role of accompanists. Their importance almost overrode the facilitators. Two obstacles were found when the accompanists tried to expand their work domain: namely the role conflict being both judicial volunteers and accompanists and the poor knowledge of VOM procedure. Consequently, some of the meetings were deem superficial or less effectively as they were supposed to be. This study suggests two scenarios: one is to promote accompanists as co-facilitators or volunteer facilitators. Their interaction, cooperation and cognitive consensus with professional facilitator should be strengthened. The other scenario is to reduce their involvement in the actual meeting. In order to live up to their name as "accompanists", they are supposed to act as judicial volunteers and provide both parties pure support and judicial protection.

參考文獻


陳祖輝,2003,<本土性的復歸式正義「和解」經驗建構:探索性的文本分析研
陳淑貞,2008,<犯罪被害人保護法簡介—律師能為修復式正義做些什麼?>,
許春金、陳玉書、黃政達,2007,<調解制度中受調解人修復性影響因素之研究
《身心障礙研究》3(2):122-136。
林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花,2005,<質性研究方法:訪談模式與實施步驟分析>,

被引用紀錄


翁逸玲(2014)。修復式正義在少年事件的運用〔碩士論文,國立中正大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0033-2110201614015463

延伸閱讀