正當法律程序原則在少年事件處理法中之適用

The Application of the Principle of Due Process of Law in Juvenile Proceeding Act

石家齊(Jia-Chi Shih)

指導教授 ： 廖正豪

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系/碩士(2011年)

摘要

本文主要目標在於檢視我國少年事件處理法中關於正當法律程序原則的落實情形，但為達成此目標必須先去探究正當法律程序原則在少年事件之中是否應該有不同的樣貌和要求，如果有，那麼是為甚麼必須有不同於成人司法的考量，更重要的是，那些考量又是甚麼?關於「少年事件中的正當法律程序原則為何」此一問題的解答，我們試著從幾個方面去釐清這個先決問題，首先我們從正當法律原則的內涵切入，這是整個問題最基礎以及核心的部分，在這裡我們從學理前進到比較法的介紹，最後在我國憲政實務中落腳，從這些觀察中我們認為正當法律程序的精神雖然難以確切的定義其內涵、或者我們認為它的本質上就不宜被窄化的定義，但是我們仍肯定它有其基本的底限，並在此基本要求上容許一定的彈性空間，亦肯定了正當法律程序原則的精神在我國有其適用的空間、亦屬重要的憲政精神。次者，我們將目光投向深深影響我國少年事件處理法的兩個國家—美國以及日本，借鏡於兩國的少年法制演變讓我們更深入的了解本文核心議題—少年法中是否應該有不一樣的正當法律程序原則的要求，從美、日的少年法制史觀察，我們了解了「社會政治背景」、「少年非行對策」、「正當法律程序原則」三者是如何的糾結而相互影響，以及這個問題的多重影響因素。也因此我們認為，正當法律程序原則在少年事件中的樣貌是浮動而深受少年非行對策影響的。
再從比較法的視角拉開，我們從理論面就正當法律程序在保護主義的非行對策前提下應有的調整加以探討，我們認為正當法律程序原則即使在保護主義下仍有其不可動搖的底限，而在此底限之上，我們發現了正當法律程序原則與保護主義目的達成間的衝突確實存在，亦即，保障少年的正當法律程序權利應該有異於成人的設計，否則將難以達成保護少年的目標，關於調整的方向，我們建議採取類似美國法上的馬休斯三項平衡測試的精神，並配合憲法的明文限制加以設計。
最後我們回到我國少年事件處理法，關於正當法律程序原則在少年事件處理法中應該有如何的樣貌以及其標準的問題，我們提出了以我國憲法第8條的明文規定為界限加上「合理的聽審」以及「公平的審判者」為框，以有助於保護少年目標達成和正當法律程序精神的調和為基本原則作為檢視我國少年事件處理法在立法規範面和實務運作面的衡量基準，並基於保障少年所需要的正當法律程序原則的面向，就少年事件處理法關於正當法律程序原則的落實的幾個重要議題，從不一樣的觀點提出檢視和建議。

關鍵字

少年事件處理法 ； 正當法律程序 ； 少年保護事件 ； 少年刑事案件

並列摘要

The main goal of this article is to examine the implement of principle of due process in Juvenile Proceeding Act in Taiwan. To achieve this goal, it’s primary to determine whether principle of due process in Juvenile Code should differ from that in adult judiciary. If principle of due process in Juvenile Code shouldn’t be the counterpart of that in adult judicature, it’s necessary to clarify the concerns that support the differentiation of the two systems.
The attempt of figuring out what principle of due process in Juvenile Code is would be made in some aspects. First, this article focuses on discussing the spirit of principle of due process, the most fundamental part of this inquiry. We research on the theory, the comparative law, and then, the enforcement of due process of law in our Constitution. It leads to the conclusions that although it’s hard to strictly define the content of principle of due process, we deem there’s a bottom line within its spirit. In addition, there’s still flexibility while sticking to the bottom line. Another conclusion in this article affirms the existence of due process of law in Constitution of ROC. Due process of law demonstrates important constitutional spirit.
Second, this article refers to the relative experiences in the U.S and Japan, the two influential countries on the development of Juvenile Code in Taiwan. Observing the evolvement of Juvenile Code in these two countries helps us get better insight into the main issue of this article—should principle of due process in Juvenile Code differ from that in adult judiciary? By observing the history of the enactment of Juvenile Proceeding Act in these two countries, we understand how “social and political background,” “delinquency policy” and “due process of law” interact with and influence one another. Therefore we deem due process of law in Juvenile Code to be mobile and deeply influenced by delinquency policy.
Furthermore, the theoretical discussion of the adequate adjustment of due process of law under the protective tendency about delinquency is presented. This article indicates the bottom line within principle of due process should remain unshakable even under such protective atmosphere. However, above the bottom line, there indeed are conflicts among due process of law and the purpose of juvenile protection. In conclusion, the differentiation between the design of due process of law in Juvenile Code and that in adult judiciary is essential for the goal of juvenile protection. As for the direction of adjustment, this article suggests simulating the spirit of Mathews’ Three-Factor Balancing Test under the regulations of Constitution.
Last but not the least, this article examines the current status of due process of law in Juvenile Proceeding Act in Taiwan. In regard to the criterion of measuring the enactment and implement of due process of law in Juvenile Proceeding Act in Taiwan, the article suggests considering Article 8 as the basic guidelines coordinating with reasonable Hearing and independent adjudicator. What’s more, the incorporation of the goal of juvenile protection with the spirit of due process of law can serve as another important measurement. This article aims at examining the implement of due process of law of juvenile by providing reviews and suggestions towards some important issues from another aspect of juvenile protection.

並列關鍵字

due process of law ； Juvenile Proceeding Act

參考文獻

6.李茂生，少年犯罪的預防與矯治制度的批判－一個系統論的考察，台大法學論叢，第29卷第2期， 2000年1月。

4.李茂生，新少年事件處理法的立法基本策略，台大法學論叢第28卷第2期， 1999年1月。

31.陳怡如，司法院大法官正當法律程序原則違憲審查標準之探究，弘光人文社會學報，第6期，2006年8月。

34.陳怡如，司法院大法官正當法律程序原則違憲審查標準之探究，弘光人文社會學報，第6期，2006年8月。

2.李幼妃，律師辯護權之行使對刑事審判結果之影響，國立臺北大學犯罪學研究所碩士論文，2010年2月。