透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.23.104.114
  • 學位論文

關於「保護觀察」之做為少年之保護處分 -日本保護司制度的有效性

About the probation as a protective measure toward juvenile —the validity for the volunteer-probation-officers system in Japan

指導教授 : 李茂生
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


在日本,少年犯罪案件有減少的傾向,因涉刑法而被逮捕調查的少年人數,自平成16年(西元2004年)起,已經連續11年逐年減少中;而觸犯刑罰法律的少年人數,在最近5年也是逐年下降。但是,每當發生了少年犯案的兇殘殺人事件時,整個日本就會湧起有關少年法的議論,被媒體連日報導的煽動而心生不安的市民們,往往也就變得傾向要有嚴刑峻法的少年法。然而,在電視新聞裡被聳動地報導,以及讓多數國民聚焦關心的事件,可以說都是「特殊的」事件。適用少年法來裁決的少年犯罪事件,其中多數是因其家庭環境因素、個人心理尚未健全成熟或是學習不足等等原因所致的。而少年法的理念,不言可喻,即是「為保障少年健全之自我成長,調整其成長環境,並矯治其性格」的主旨。 在法院裁定保護處分時,少年最常被諭知的處分即為保護觀察,而支撐保護觀察的大支柱就是保護司制度,因此,對於這些無意中犯了罪的少年們,藉由檢討以保護司制度為中心的保護觀察,加以斟酌思考出保障他們之健全成長的方式。 保護司是創始於日本的一種社會處遇方式,主要是幫助犯了罪或是素行不良的人之更生的一種支援制度。本文研究保護司制度的目的之一,即是在於剖析保護司制度本身的特殊性。保護司制度是支撐日本更生保護系統的重要支柱之一,在刑事政策領域裡以志工的定位,一直都獲得來自各方面很高的評價。 然而,近年來,保護司制度也面臨了各式各樣的問題。保護觀察對象本身的問題複雜且多樣化、家庭關係或是地域關係的連帶感漸漸淡化等等之問題,使得保護司的工作日益困難。除此之外,地域裡的社會活動基盤也不若以前的牢固。再者,活動運作的困難化、保護司的負擔大增等等的背景,使得保護司的招募工作變得更加困難。 目光轉向台灣,卻發現在這裡是執行著與日本不同的少年保護觀察制度。日本與台灣,在社會制度或是法制度都有相似相通之處,本文也思考是否從台灣的法制架構裡,找到些解決日本現在所面臨的問題的頭緒。首先,確認日本與台灣兩國的法制差異之後,透過差異的比較研究,最後,為兩國的少年保護觀察制度裡,提供做為截長補短的契機。 本論文的結論中提出若干提案,首先,從台灣的幾乎完全由保護觀察官擔當保護觀察工作的制度來看,日本是可以再增加保護觀察官的人員比例。此外,為了解決日本保護司不足的問題,也可規劃招募年輕的保護司。同時,台灣的保護處分中有一項「親職補導教育」,也可以考慮導入日本。最後,則是比較日台兩國的社會服務命令以及探討此制度之功過。

並列摘要


The crime rate of juvenile in Japan is declining. The number of arrested juvenile delinquents has been declining since 2004, while the number of juvenile delinquents has also been declining for the recent 5 years. Whenever a cruel murder committed by youths occurs, the general republic tends to progress towards more punitive juvenile justice system. However, it should be noted that these are extraordinary cases. Most of the juvenile delinquent cases are caused by their family, social environments, unstable mental state or lake of adequate education. That’s why the Juvenile Act aims at the protection of minor by providing a wholesome environment for the raising of youths and their rehabilitation. When youths who commit crimes were sentenced to correctional measures by juvenile courts, probation is most assigned to the young delinquents. In Japan, the volunteer-probation-officers system supports juvenile probation fundamentally. The juvenile delinquents have to go through the probation and are supervised by the probation officers or the volunteer-probation-officers. Researches on the volunteer-probation-officers system can definitely create a more appropriate way for juvenile’s correction and rehabilitation. The volunteer-probation-officers system is originated in Japan. It’s a supporting system, which aims to keep offenders out of trouble and prevent recidivism. One purpose of this thesis is to investigate the particularity of the unique system, which the volunteers work with the probation officers in penal system. This system itself is confronted with difficulties, nevertheless. The difficulties include that the juvenile delinquents carrying more complicated problems than ever, the linkage among family members or community members is getting loose. This makes the volunteer-probation-officers’ task tough. Furthermore, the background can only add difficulty recruiting new members into the system. As to Taiwan’s situation, there is no such volunteer-probation-officer system. However, Japan and Taiwan do share similar social and juristic systems. A comparative study on the juvenile probation system can be inspiring to the two countries for solution to their respective difficulties . The conclusion provides several suggestions. First of all is to assure more probation officers, and recruit young generation into the volunteer-probation-officers system. Besides, “parental education”, a correctional measure practiced in Taiwan, can be an appropriate design for Japan. At the end of the thesis, the merit and demerit of the system is referred. Keywords: the volunteer-probation-officer, probation-officer, probation, community treatment, a correctional measure toward juvenile

參考文獻


内閣府政府統計(2015)。《平成26 年度特定非営利活動法人及び市民の社会貢献に関する実態調査》。載於:
參考文獻
一. 中文
司法院(編)(2003)。《少年假日生活輔導執行手冊》。台北:司法院。
司法院(編)(2005)。《少年保護管束執行手冊》。台北:司法院。

延伸閱讀